Let’s Call Establishment Dems What They Are: CORPORATISTS

[Segami]

Last edited Sat May 14, 2016, 09:45 AM - Edit history (1)

The Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia is going to be sponsored by the worst of the worst. Healthcare lobbyists, proponents of fracking, and even Comcast will be hosting the event, as DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz has decided to lift the convention’s ban on lobbyists. America’s Lawyer Mike Papantonio talks about the fall of the Democratic Party with Thom Hartmann.

[Segami]

1. These Turd Wayers have destroyed the Democratic party....

[Go Vols]

84. :/

In the late 1970s, as large corporations turned into transnational giants, they pumped huge amounts of cash into the political system. This largesse lured, first, the Republican Party, in the 80s, followed by the Democratic Party in the ‘90s, and precipitated a rightward political shift as both parties rewrote their policies to compete for the same corporate contributions.

Before this, from 1932-1976, the Democratic Party as a whole was far more progressive. The issues and approaches advocated today by Bernie Sanders were considered mainstream Democratic ideas by Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Lyndon Johnson, and even many moderate Republicans. It was common to support strict financial regulation, liberal immigration, social services for the poor, and progressive tax policies.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tony-brasunas/there-is-a-moderate-republican-in-this-race_b_9704194.html

[cliffordu]

92. K&R

[cali]

2. Let's not be reductive

[BootinUp]

12. too late, lol.

[TDale313]

3. I prefer Corporatists.

Sadly, that no longer belongs just to the Republican Party.

[Arneoker]

16. No longer?

Ever hear of the Gilded Age?

Who was that member of the 1% who got elected in 1932, and what did he do in office?

Who made the device you are using to access the Internet? Dave's Homemade Computers, or someone else?

It's one thing to want to do something about one sector of society that is particularly wealthy having wildly disproportionate power and influence. It's another to lose any kind of perspective.

[TDale313]

18. Corporatists are now a major part of the Democratic Party.

And that's a huge problem. And until we actually own that our Party has become part of the problem as well, we aren't gonna fix anything. It's so easy to say "oh, bad Dems are just Republicans" Sadly no. Too often they're exactly where the power of the Democratic Party stand.

Oh, and FDR and Kennedy weren't Corporatists. They actually were fighting for those not in the 1% to get a fair shake.

[Dustlawyer]

41. Yes! It is ludacris to think that the power of the big campaign donors

is harmless to Democratic politicians! When you allow legalized bribery to get and keep these people in Congress and the White House, and their political career depends upon that money, to think it has no effect on their decisions is major denial! It's up there with Birthers and Climate Change deniers!

The big donors choose who runs for these offices by who they back and who they don't. Just like they manipulated Tweety with Clinton donor campaign cash for his wife's run for Congress, they garnered Hillary lots of political endorsements and Super Delagates with their donations.

[puffy socks]

42. Hahaha

Both their family fortunes come from corporate America !

See? not all wealthy, investors, and business people are bad.

But if the Sanders crowd had read their history before knowing who it was , they'd have strung them both up.


FDR family money was made in dry goods, real estate and sugar imports. Wealth was passed down from generation to generation, with each adding to the amount. Franklin's father made his money by investing in coal and railroads.

Warren Delano, the father of Franklin's mother, apprenticed himself to importing firms in New York and Boston. At the age of twenty-four, he moved to Canton, China. There his amassed a considerable fortune exporting goods from China to the West and importing opium from India to China.
Kennedy made their fortune from Wall Street and managing Bethlehem Steel

[TDale313]

50. I know the history.

It's not about the wealth. It's about the policies, and who politicians are fighting for, and if you treat public service as a chance to make your own fortune. FDR and Kennedy were on the right side of that.

But go ahead and spread the RW meme that people arguing for a more equal society and for getting the money out of politics and reining in corporate power hate wealthy people

[BillZBubb]

52. Good luck trying to change the spots on that leopard.

RW memes (and policies) now are all the vogue with the Hillary crowd. Love the 1%!

FDR: "I welcome their hatred".

Hillary: "I welcome their money".

[Arneoker]

61. So some of the rich can transcend their own narrow interests

But those taking money from the rich can never transcend such interests? Of course a lot of politicians don't, and there is a systemic problem. But that doesn't stop individual politicians from making some principled decisions regardless of who gives them money.

[TheKentuckian]

64. Sure, but blindly depending on that you have one of those exceptions

Particularly when the we're a huge part of spearheading embracing the very forces buying influence doesn't make sense because it scarcely matters, Clinton is so aligned with the folks buying that the question of what lever drives the influence is irrelevant.

When there is no shortage of chickens nor eggs, which came first might be an interesting question but it is not a relevant one to the situation at hand.

[merrily]

69. +1

Hi. I have not seen you in ages. I feared you'd given up on DU.

[TheKentuckian]

90. Not quite but I needed a break. Glad to see you as always.

[merrily]

91. I get it.

Do you know about JackpineRadicals.org? All posters there support Bernie Sanders for President.

There have been some complaints about the software, but they are working on version 2 already and they only opened mid- December.

Home Page http://jackpineradicals.org/content.php
All forums http://jackpineradicals.org/forum.php

[TheKentuckian]

94. I'll be over, thanks.

[merrily]

95. Great.

[BillZBubb]

54. You aren't very good at analytical thought.

FDR: "I welcome their hatred".

Hillary: "I welcome their money".

It didn't matter where their family money came from. What mattered is who the fought for. Hillary fights for her corporate sponsors and her followers fall all over themselves to support it.

[Zorro]

65. When and where did Hillary say "I welcome their money"?

The FDR quote is pretty well known, but I'm not finding any source for the statement you attribute to Clinton.

[timmymoff]

79. Most would be able to determine she welcomes their money

the very minute she sought donations from Jeb Bush donors and Ted Cruz's donors, but you already knew that, but like good hilarity supporters you chose to overlook that along with the many other unethical actions she is involved with.

[Zorro]

80. So Clinton has not actually stated "I welcome their money"?

How very ethical of Sanders puritans to imply she actually said that.

[Arneoker]

58. Not saying that there is no problem

In fact, there has always been a problem. For all of our history. For all of the history of world civilization.

Yes, FDR and Kennedy were progressives. Of course they were compromising progressives, like Hillary Clinton is. And they were of the 1%. Those of the 1% have always been disproportionately represented in our political leadership, even among those truly fighting for the rest of us.

I am not saying that this is the way it has always been so don't bother trying to change it. What I am saying is that the problem is more deeply rooted than it is portrayed most of the time, and that making progress against it takes a lot of thought, effort and time. And part of the difficulty is figuring out what kinds of tradeoffs to make.

So this is more than the parties. A party is the tool, never the end. You do need to take care of the tool, but not for its own sake.

[2banon]

67. I totally agree with your observations in this post. I just think it's time to flip the paradigm

Bill Clinton didn't do us any favors during his eight years, except with appointing Ruth Ginsberg. I'll give him that and it isn't insignificant. The establishment of Third Way/DLC did great damage to the socio-economic foundation and fabric of the policies established by FDR.

I could bring myself to ignore and overlook a lot of the egregious shortcomings if she had made a different decision in 2000 and divorced him on the day after leaving the WH. Made her own way to the Senate, and beyond.

Unfortunately, she's joined at the hip and together with him up to their necks in all manner of egregious 'activities' and associations which cannot be undone, or ignored.

We need a paradigm shift in regards to policy and cast of players moving us forward out of the swamp of corruption and aggressive Neo Conservative foreign policies, IMO.

[merrily]

66. FDR, even in his own time, was not typical. However, it's clear the OP is referring to now, not

Democrats almost a century ago.

[Ferd Berfel]

33. Yes Sad

[GoneFishin]

4. Yep. If the Republican Party hadn't gone coocoo for Cocoa Puffs 2/3 of Hillary supporters would

be registered Republicans. They just had nowhere else to go but to co-opt the Democratic Party.

[wendylaroux]

78. It's more like third way dems crowded the coocoos by going right, and they had to

make room,going crazier and crazier.

[CrowCityDem]

5. No, no, no, and NO

Establishment Democrats are not Republicans.

They don't want to deport twelve million people from this country. They don't want to make racism and discrimination the law of the land. They don't want to throw millions of people off their health insurance. They don't want to eliminate the minimum wage. They don't want to take us back to the 50s, etc., etc.

Only someone who doesn't know what a Republican is today would say such a stupid thing.

[Fawke Em]

8. But they do want to cut Social Security and Medicare.

They don't want single payer.

They don't want a $15 minimum wage.

They don't want to bring us into the 21st Century.

Only someone who can't see the forest for the trees wouldn't understand the difference between corporate Democrats and Republicans is minimal.

[Ferd Berfel]

19. THat's the Elephant in the room that we're not talking about enouugh

There is almost no difference between "centrist/moderate' republicans and Right wing /conservative Neo-Dems represented by the Clinton's, and puppets like DWS.

It would appear that Clinton is attempting to merge the two into a new Right Wing Conservative, neoCon, Corporatist Party and named - in an incredibly Orwellian fashion - as the 'New Democrat' Party. with the insane on the Right calling themselves 'Republican' and the FDR, Liberal, Progressives, Humanists on the left - with no Party at all.

This 'election' will be the coup de grace to democracy, Social Security, Medicare,and the Middle-class.

[merrily]

68. The elephant in the room in more ways than one. And bubba

already ended "welfare as we know it."

[Ferd Berfel]

76. Not just that...

[merrily]

81. Not just that, but the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000.

You know, the one about mortgage derivatives that eventually led to the collapse of the economies of several nations.

I was not really trying to be all inclusive in my other post, though. Ending "welfare as we know it" just seemed natural to mention when ending Social Security and Medicare was under discussion.

[Ferd Berfel]

82. Hear Hear

[Bettie]

96. This is exactly why I am so concerned for my children's future

If the choice is between Clinton and Trump...my kids lose no matter who wins.

But, with either of them Wall Street Wins (really big once Social Security is given to them as a plaything), "trade" agreement proponents win, multi-national corporations win.

Basically, everyone who isn't a corporate "person" or in the bubble of 1%er wealth loses.

[bkkyosemite]

9. But they want a hell of a lot of the average Americans to continue to suffer with their

corporate induced laws and regulations.

[TrueDemVA]

10. Neither do a lot of republicans,

The ignorant and vocal ones want that, of course, but there are a lot of republicans who are embarrassed by what their party has become as well.

I will somewhat agree with you about establishment Dems not being republican, but they have definitely becoming Corporate lobbyists instead of representing the good of the people. They are sell outs.

While not being republicans, technically, they sure do have strong republican tendancies.

[Dustlawyer]

13. They just want to give our tax dollars to the wealthy and the MIC, that's all!

They have to be the ones to start the dismantling of our social safety net, we wouldn't allow Republicans to do it!

[KPN]

30. There is a difference for sure -- but not much ...

in terms of real positive impact on most Americans' economic lives. Oh sure, the establishment Dems do enough to placate much of their base -- easy to do when you compare it to what Rs propose -- but they don't really push legislation that would improve the masses lives significantly. They do enough to keep them at bay, to keep them voting for them.

[Thirties Child]

47. Establishment Democrats aren't the Republicans of today

They're the Republicans from the 60s. I mourn for what the Democratic Party once was.

[merrily]

72. NO ONE is actually going to do those things. That's primary red meat, full stop.

Also, your post is written entirely in the negative. Not a positive statement in the bunch.

And Hillary's even put Supreme Court reproductive rights cases, such as they are, on the table.

[2banon]

6. Pretty Sad State of Affairs ..

Going to be an interesting Convention with Bernie peeps on the floor exposing this bullshit directly in their faces. I can't wait to see it.

[KPN]

32. Ditto.

Might even be worth a trip to Philadelphia.

[2banon]

71. It would be expensive for me, unless I could hook up a ride with local Bernie peeps

hailing in from the Bay Area, California.

[LWolf]

7. Keep saying it.

Establishment "Democrats" pretense at liberalism is ending.

[KPN]

34. Let's hope so. I hope all Berners here at DU help each other stay engaged in this

battle going forward.

[redstateblues]

11. Lumping in Democrats with Ted Cruz et al is just stupid

It's very similar to the tactics of Limbaugh and the Tea Party. The main difference is that the TP gets people elected. The Purity Party/BSS are an abject failure at that

[KPN]

38. Granted. But lumping them in with Repubs generally is not far-fetched by any means.

The system is rigged. The sooner more people come to grips with that, the sooner we can do something to improve it. Until then, we suffer through corruption, mass deception, Rep- vs Dem good cop bad cop game playing that maintains status quop and protects the economic elite at average Americans' cost, etc.

[kgnu_fan]

14. So true....sadly...

[cali]

15. Absofuckinglutely

[Dragonfli]

17. Sounds familiar to me, almost Like I muttered something sleepwalking

Alert in 3...2...1... You know what to do, you told me yourselves you would, might as well, fulfill that threat! Your cursive is lousy by the way use Word. or a typewriter next time..

By the way, puppies are cute and I love them - there, that should give you what you need to hit that button!

[felix_numinous]

25. You need a

((((Dragonfli))) and some troll repellent, we're working on that.

[JEB]

20. They can't resist the big money. Gotta have a bit of maral blindness

in order to cash in. Our democracy has been circumvented.

[dana_b]

21. this is exactly why some of us left and the indys are the fastest growing

voter block. But the Dems don't care. They would rather have their corporat-a-palooza/convention than go back to TRUE Democratic values. All of this is a big slap in the face to Bernie and his suporters as well. DWS and the big wigs in the party know that this is what Bernie is against and she deliberately ended that ban in February as a "FU" to him and us.

They are no longer what I consider the Democratic party. Not the party of FDR/JFK/Carter and other true Dems. Christ - even Eisenhower or NIXON would be consider left wing in today's "Democratic" party! And most of this came about under the Clintons. As they say in the video, they are Republicans minus a few social issues. And those social issues are being fought by the corporations and lobbyists that the Dems so lovingly welcome into the fold! Is the act of pushing forward a few social issues just a ruse so that they can keep calling themselves "Democratic"? Think about that.

To those of you who think this is just fine - congrats, you are destroying the soul of the party. Soon there will be no difference between the parties because those lobbysists and corporations couldn't give two shits about a woman's right to choose, worker's rights (HA! That's rich!), stopping war, climate change (again - a total ruse!), immigration reform, BLM (oh, wow...) or any other social issue. They are just SO happy that the Democrats have come around to where the Republicans have been for decades. More money, more MONEY!!

We will soon have one big party with two names. If this gets a hide, so be it. Tom Hartmann and Mike Papantonio know what's up. They even said it "progressives have no where to go except independent".

[seabeyond]

22. Any Dem that doesn't support Sanders is "establishment" ergo corporatist. Nice insult of Democrats.

[redstateblues]

27. It's a typical Bernie fan insult. Very childish

[Segami]

31. Yours is a typical empty Hillary lame response.......

But I agree with you,....your response IS "very childish".


carry on........

[merrily]

73. The OP talks about politicians and you go ad hom on the OP. That's mature?

[KPN]

40. It's true. You just don't know it.

[BillZBubb]

59. Sometimes the truth hurts.

Do you deny Hillary is the establishment candidate? I didn't think so.

Do you deny that Hillary has a corporatist record and is heavily bankrolled by the corporate elite? I bet you do, but that is because most Hillary supporters choose not to know.

If you support Hillary you are a corporatist supporter whether you know it or not.

[Arneoker]

62. No, it's just a lazy substitute for thinking

[Babel_17]

23. Their way forward for the party is grim at best

You just can't seriously piss off as many voters as they do. They're not good enough salespeople to close the deal. They operate more like bank robbers, doing bold daylight heists.

People are looking for posses to rein in the corporate interests. The establishment will be facing one if they keep going along their current path.

[felix_numinous]

24. American Revolution happened so that the elite wouldn't own the rest of us

with their power and influence--they have to be regulated and their power checked or this power becomes destructive. It is human nature to get drunk on power itself and this addiction is blind and can make people become very cruel in defending it.

We are once again at a crossroads, having to declare independence from being owned by these people. The TTIP will declare ownership of everything and cannot be allowed to pass, and we are seeing these people going far beyond reason or ethics.

This is where all good people need to stand up and do the right thing, we know the way, the doors have been opened by Bernie Sanders, all we have to do is walk through it and make sure every one of us is counted, heard and represented.

[redstateblues]

28. You have been and you are 3,000,000 votes short

[larkrake]

45. Broken record, showing the ignorance

Conventions choose the nominee, not the voters. If Bernie had 20 million more, they would still deny him the nomination because the corporations own the DNC and they cannot allow truth over their long term plans. Hillary is their puppet, Given all thrown at Bernie so far, there will be a birth of a 3rd party- one of the People, far larger than DEMS or REPUB. Hillary will have only 4 yrs of a life of Hell in the office, with more obstruction than Obama ever suffered. She lacks the cool brilliance of an Obama mind, and answers with vengeance. No woman will ever be elected again. She will be our Thatcher.

All we can do to counterbalance her reckless decision making is to support and elect down ticket folks as honest as Bernie. They are rare, but they do exist.

[Arneoker]

63. If, if, if, if...

So the hypothetical that cannot be proven refutes what we know are the facts?

But at least you are talking about electing people down ticket, so that is of some use.

[Recursion]

26. Umm... OK... do you actually have any familiarity with the history of that term?

Because it's sounding like you don't. Start in the 1920s.

[warrprayer]

29. kick and rec

[Ferd Berfel]

35. K&R

[Nye Bevan]

36. Do you count President Obama as a "corporatist"? (nt)

[kcjohn1]

43. Is this a trick question?

He as big as corporatist as you will find in the democratic party.

[BillZBubb]

60. Sadly yes, but not to the degree of Hillary.

He's made some errors supporting the corporatist agenda.

If, after he leaves office, he starts cashing in on big corporate money like the Clintons, then we will know the extent of his involvement.

[Armstead]

37. Kick -- I wish more Democrats actually listened and took this stuff seriously

Mike Pap and Hartman have been on the front lines against Republicans for years.

Their anger at the Democratic Sell Out is well earned.

[riversedge]

39. I might if it was not so over the top!

[Armstead]

46. I wish it was over the top

Unfortunately this is what its come down to.

One of the most abusive and powerful corporations in the US is going to have an important role at the Democratic Convention.

And of course that has nothing to do with the large slate of issues regarding how the Internet is operated, how much consumers have to pay for information, the desire of Bog media to merge, their role as gatekeepers and toll collectors....etc.

Nahhh. Just a coincidence

[brush]

44. If you don't like the party join with Sanders' movement after the conventions . . .

and election to convene and establish a movement structure to get progressives elected to Congress and down-ticket offices in 2018 and pave the way for passage of progressive legislation.

Sanders already has the fundraising structure in place. All that needs to be done is organizational structure so that the movement doesn't evaporate, and let's face it — after Sanders loses the nomination, like Occupy did.

The frustration with the Democratic Party, and the enormous energy of the Sanders supporters can be channeled in a positive way. Why this could even be the ground work for a new party since so many seem to hate the "establishment" Dems.

Kinda reminds me of a song by the great Billie Holiday — "God Bless the Child that's Got His Own".

[Thirties Child]

48. Now that the Democratic party has morphed into moderate Republicans...

there is a vacuum on the left that progressives can - must - fill. I'm an octogenarian, can't attend night meetings, but have a telephone and a computer, am willing to do whatever I can to keep Bernie's ideas alive and thriving. We have to do what we can. If we fail, the future is unthinkable.

[LongTomH]

49. I'm following Thom Hartmann's suggestion on taking over the party from the bottom up.

I've registered as a precinct committee person in my precinct. I hope we can eventually take back the Democratic party. Others may work on a 3rd party movement.

[coffeeAM]

51. The old blue dogs are 1 cycle away from being the minority and they know it.

[beaglelover]

53. And BANKSTERS!! And TURDWAY!!!

LOL!!!

[bjo59]

55. Absolutely. The corporatists know there is no such thing as

Democrats and Republicans - so "old school" - but it's a good piece of theater to keep the serfs distracted. The divide that matters is the corporatist/non-corporatist divide and the corporatists thought they had finally won and won permanently. Bernie Sanders is an anomaly from their point of view and one that must be stopped at all costs. His popularity is proof that the system they have erected still has a few weak points. What an irritation!

[tralala]

56. Why make up new terms to describe ordinary bourgeois politicians

[cantbeserious]

57. This Revolt Has Been Building For Years - The DWS, DNC, DLC, Third-Way Has Only Themselves To Blame

eom

[merrily]

74. YES and YES. Thanks!

[B Calm]

70. Predatory Capitalism needs just a little sprinkle of Socialism to keep it in check and that's

the last thing these turd wayers want!

[NewImproved Deal]

77. Yep! On the Big Issues, the REAL issues...

War, Economic Justice, Trade and restoring FDR's Social Contract, there's not a dime's worth of difference. Choose your Oligarch, America...

?1453647036

[Phlem]

75. Fucking Kick and R plus a Yuuuuuge Amen!

Yet the fact still seems to escape certain Democrats. The DNC and their subordinates have know this for Decades and also lot of people who don't seem to be on DU anymore.

[pdsimdars]

83. Beautiful video.

[PowerToThePeople]

85. PC for fascist

I prefer calling them the latter.

[Duppers]

86. Kicked and Recommended

+100

[JudyM]

87. Excellent post, Segami. Thank you. And now if you'll excuse me...

[Progressive dog]

88. We are all corporatists now LOL

That's the way to win friends and influence people, call them names. The Democratic party has won 4 of the last 6 Presidential elections, so the party hasn't fallen yet.

[Urchin]

89. The difference between Hillary and Trump

The difference between Hillary and Trump, is in deciding which American gets to use which bathroom.

On the really important issue, wealth disparity and the financial exploitation of the majority of Americans, I see little difference.

Thomas Jefferson said that merchants have no country. Remember how Western Imperialism exploited workers in places like China and India?

Well, wake up people: Globalism is the modern Imperialism, and the American worker is on their way to being economically enslaved the way Indians were in the Raj, the way the Chinese were exploited . . . that we are Americans means little to merchants who have no country.

[senz]

93. Well of course! It's so obvious.