Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Report: Obama Picks Kerry For Next Secretary Of State [View all]woo me with science
(32,139 posts)39. Perhaps the administration is not really all that into having progressive majorities in Congress.
We have seen this DLC/Third Way/corporate game before from our party. There are advantages for corporatists on both sides of the aisle in having a close balance of power that is more easily manipulated than a solid lead on either side.
Let's review:
http://www.salon.com/2010/02/23/democrats_34/
Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 11:24 AM UTC
The Democratic Partys deceitful game
They are willing to bravely support any progressive bill as long as there's no chance it can pass
By Glenn Greenwald
Democrats perpetrate the same scam over and over on their own supporters, and this illustrates perfectly how its played:
.... Rockefeller was willing to be a righteous champion for the public option as long as it had no chance of passing...But now that Democrats are strongly considering the reconciliation process which will allow passage with only 50 rather than 60 votes and thus enable them to enact a public option Rockefeller is suddenly inclined to oppose it because he doesnt think the timing of it is very good and its too partisan. What strange excuses for someone to make with regard to a provision that he claimed, a mere five months ago (when he knew it couldnt pass), was such a moral and policy imperative that he would not relent in ensuring its enactment.
The Obama White House did the same thing. As I wrote back in August, the evidence was clear that while the President was publicly claiming that he supported the public option, the White House, in private, was doing everything possible to ensure its exclusion from the final bill (in order not to alienate the health insurance industry by providing competition for it). Yesterday, Obama while having his aides signal that they would use reconciliation if necessary finally unveiled his first-ever health care plan as President, and guess what it did not include? The public option, which he spent all year insisting that he favored oh-so-much but sadly could not get enacted: Gosh, I really want the public option, but we just dont have 60 votes for it; what can I do?. As I documented in my contribution to the NYT forum yesterday, now that theres a 50-vote mechanism to pass it, his own proposed bill suddenly excludes it.
This is what the Democratic Party does...Theyre willing to feign support for anything their voters want just as long as theres no chance that they can pass it. They won control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections by pretending they wanted to compel an end to the Iraq War and Bush surveillance and interrogation abuses because they knew they would not actually do so; and indeed, once they were given the majority, the Democratic-controlled Congress continued to fund the war without conditions, to legalize Bushs eavesdropping program, and to do nothing to stop Bushs habeas and interrogation abuses (Gosh, what can we do? We just dont have 60 votes).
The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it. One minute, its Jay Rockefeller as the Prime Villain leading the way in protecting Bush surveillance programs and demanding telecom immunity; the next minute, its Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer joining hands and breaking with their party to ensure Michael Mukaseys confirmation as Attorney General; then its Big Bad Joe Lieberman single-handedly blocking Medicare expansion; then its Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb joining with Lindsey Graham to support the de-funding of civilian trials for Terrorists; and now that they cant blame Lieberman or Ben Nelson any longer on health care (since they dont need 60 votes), Jay Rockefeller voluntarily returns to the Villain Role, stepping up to put an end to the pretend-movement among Senate Democrats to enact the public option via reconciliation.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
165 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Mixed feelings, though Kerry will be good. I hope the rumors re: Vicky Kennedy appointment
hlthe2b
Dec 2012
#2
Yep! The risk of brown getting his seat is unfortunate. However, Kerry will be an EXCELLENT
Kahuna
Dec 2012
#33
I don't think I'd use Adelson as a winning example here. LOL. He didn't do so well with
CTyankee
Dec 2012
#116
Rice was never 1st pick. McCain&Co and RW mediawhores had their dog and pony show anyway.
blm
Dec 2012
#4
They phuked Rice and Obama got blamed for it, just look at DU; they got what they wanted. nt
patrice
Dec 2012
#6
Kerry is great, one of my favorites. You should have seen how hard I worked for him in 2004.
JDPriestly
Dec 2012
#10
In his autobiography, Brown spoke of showing up for his first date with his wife
karynnj
Dec 2012
#74
If John Kerry gave a shit about us, why would he risk losing the Senate seat just to add another
The Stranger
Dec 2012
#7
Why the weak knees, Strange? BTW - You are welcome to name ONE lawmaker who has effected
blm
Dec 2012
#12
Well, you say Kerry's work has been 'pathetic' and I'm holding you accountable for your claim.
blm
Dec 2012
#27
Baloney. And the 'weak knees' referred specifically to your excessive fearfulness.
blm
Dec 2012
#147
WOW - Did you try to discourage Warren when polls showed Brown unbeatable for 2012, too?
blm
Dec 2012
#162
Politico and polls that also pushed the idea that Brown was unbeatable in 2012, too.
blm
Dec 2012
#161
OMG! *knees shaking* Politico is saying Brown's unbeatable.....just like they did in 2011 and 2012.
blm
Dec 2012
#163
He has served in the Senate for 28 years. He has every right to leave politics and become SoS
KittyWampus
Dec 2012
#132
The problem is that it could cost us a U.S. Senate seat when every single vote there counts
The Stranger
Dec 2012
#144
I know John Kerry wants the job, and I know he will be really great because he is extremely
JDPriestly
Dec 2012
#9
Do you really believe Mass Dems will be as inattentive in 2014 as they were in 2010?
blm
Dec 2012
#13
It won't be in 2014 ... won't there be a special election next few months?
Drunken Irishman
Dec 2012
#101
Love the cowardice in this thread. We can hold his damn seat people. Get with it.
phleshdef
Dec 2012
#11
Nah, they won't ... The entire reason for supporting him is to gain a chance at Senate seat
hlthe2b
Dec 2012
#21
Not really - almost any Senator nominated gets lots of votes from the other side
karynnj
Dec 2012
#44
I'm saying he won't be opposed by many if any REPUGS. I can't tell if you are disagreeing with that
hlthe2b
Dec 2012
#46
Not disagreeing with little opposition - disagreeing that it is just the opportunity to get Brown
karynnj
Dec 2012
#73
I'm not filling Kerry as SOS the man is 70 years old that job need to be given to
bigdarryl
Dec 2012
#38
Perhaps the administration is not really all that into having progressive majorities in Congress.
woo me with science
Dec 2012
#39
LOL! His record precedes him. He won't win if Dems run a decent candidate.
KittyWampus
Dec 2012
#133
The GRIO link actually said Kerry was Obama's choice - not Rice something I haven't .
karynnj
Dec 2012
#91
The legislature passed a special law banning Martha Coakley from running for Senate
bluestateguy
Dec 2012
#53
I don't like a senator being chosen, but I hope it will change the state dept. for the better.
David__77
Dec 2012
#57
Do YOU live in MA? Cause if you did you'd remember the ONLY reason Brown won in the 1st
KittyWampus
Dec 2012
#134
Senator Kerry will bring the United States to a leadership position on Climate Change
machI
Dec 2012
#118
This is why McCain tried to pull a feint with Rice. & Wasn't Kerry also instrumental in the
patrice
Dec 2012
#138
I just don't understand why Democrats are intimidated by Scott Brown. He just lost!!!
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2012
#150
The Sun-Times seems to be the only source for every single one of these reports.
Arkana
Dec 2012
#155