To Those That Say The Repugs Can Be Shamed I Offer You This

[DemocratSinceBirth]

- They voted against a paltry $250.00 for SS recipients because there was no COLA increase

-They voted against a fund for first responders, 9-11 first responders that was.


And some of us think they can be shamed into extending unemployment benefits for America's neediest families.

I wouldn't consign the fate of my worst enemy to them.

When they go to bed they must dream about turning poor folks , gay folks, brown folks, and anybody who isn't like them into compost...

[bigwillq]

1. K and R

:thumbsup:

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Yes of course. best to capitulate.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. The Argument Here Is That They Will Eventually Be Shamed Into Doing What Is Right

When has that happened?

I see you don't like the word shaming.

Can you please provide me with a scenario where we can force the Republicans to abandon their plans to abandon tax cuts for the rich and embrace plans to extend unemployment insurance for the poor?

[CTyankee]

6. This is exactly my sentiment for the following reason:

I am convinced that a lot of Republican members of both bodies of Congress don't really care if they get re-elected. Why? Because they are there to finagle a cushy lobbyist or "consulting" job with the special interests. They don't want to slog away at a legislator's salary of peanuts when they can parlay it into big bucks. They are there only so long as it takes to secure one of those cushy jobs. Either that, or they want to get on a strategic committee that can change the tax laws to benefit them personally and set them up for life. IMO, relatively few are pure idealogues.

Human greed has always, always, always plagued us in legislative offices...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

7. If I Was King ....And I Wish Warren Would Respond

I would keep the EITC, the middle class tax cuts, the payroll tax cut and let the cuts on the upper class expire. I would add another tier for the 99ers of twenty six weeks and ninety nine for everybody else. Even the king has a budget...

But I'm not king...

So how do I/we force the Republicans to do what we want?

[CTyankee]

12. We have to think harder about why these folks get elected in the first place.

We know they are back by LOTS of money and if we can't match it then we have to figure out another way. I'm afraid that's difficult to do. Here in CT Dick Blumenthal was able to pull out the election because he was a well known and loved AG. Linda McMahon spent tons of her own money on ads and tried to smear him with the Vietnam veteran thing, but Dick had that covered because he had consistently helped veteran for YEARS and they knew him to be a friend. Also, McMahon was an "unbecoming" Senate candidate in the eyes of lots of CT citizens -- but that's just CT, there are lots of places where that would not matter.

It is no wonder that Repukes want to knock the stuffing out of unions. They form a powerful force against the money guys. The anti-union sentiment is based SOLEY on that reason, IMO. But what if you live in a right to work state where unions are weak or nonexistent as a political force? THAT'S our problem.

I don't think playing hokey "framing" games does it for us. Only when it dawns on the voting populace that they have been badly misled by the republicans will there be a sea change in the red states. I just hope we can pull it off!

[emulatorloo]

18. By lying and twisting the truth. Appealing to the basest of voters emotions.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

19. I Think It's More Elemental

A hard core on the left will vote for their guy and a hard core on the right will vote for their guy. We start at a disadvantage because there are more on the other side. It's an obstacle but can be overcome... The rest vote on their personal situation. When it's good they vote for the party in power. When it isn't they don't. The economy happens to not be good now and we are being punished.

[Warren Stupidity]

33. Well it appears we do that by capitulating over and over again.

[Exilednight]

39. "Can you please provide me with a scenario" Yes I can.

This is not about shaming someone, it's about putting fear into them. The one thing Republicans want more than anything is power. If Obama were an intellectual, he could turn the tables on Republicans and paint them as the ineffective leaders that they are. Sadly, though, Obama is intelligent, but not an intellectual.

[RBInMaine]

41. "Capitulate, capitulate, capitulate, capitulate bla bla bla." It's old and starting to stink.

[safeinOhio]

3. they want to turn the country into

a Charles Dickens novel.

[young but wise]

5. Exactly. They don't give a shit.

Plus the media helps them out a lot.

[On the Road]

8. However, Whether Out of Shame or Poliical Calculus,

Republicans have voted to extend unemployment in the recent past. More than once.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

9. The Last Time It Passed It Passed With Two Repug Votes

http://apexnewsnetwork.com/25086/unemployment-extension-vote-just-waiting-for-the-presidents-approval/


I took poetic license to make a point; albeit a very small license.

[On the Road]

37. All the More Reason to Go for it Now

since it take so few GOP defectors.

[Nite Owl]

10. So we just let them get ALL that they want?

We are losing money from big and little donors because we be put up no fight so capitulating even more is going to help? We need to expose them continuously and if Obama is shown to be a fighter these donors will come around and pay up not just at election times (which they are deciding not to do now) but for ad campaigns when we need them. With all the talk of the tax deal hardly anyone knows about this stuff. Expose them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

11. How Do We Force Them To Sign A Bill Without Tax Cuts For The Rich And UI Insurance For The Poor?

If you can show me a path I will take it.

And has anybody looked at who the unemployed are.

17% of them are African American

13% of them are Hispanic

Only 5% of them are whites with college degrees.

Now do you wonder why the Republicants are in no hurry to help them.

[denem]

14. I think we are lucky that the enough of the GOP still care about the rich.

The Tea Party Reich will simply demand that every benefit and tax measure be paid for by spending cuts, the reject whatever cuts come up.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

22. 17% AA, 13% Hispanic, 5% educated whites... what are the other 75% of unemployed?

Just curious.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. I Stated It Incorrectly

That's unemployment for different groups

The 5% figure for college educated whites is hard to get my hands around. I'm underemployed, my college educated girlfriend is unemployed, and many of my peers are in the same boat.

[Nite Owl]

29. Won't know until we try it

will we. This should have been used during the last elections, it was mentioned but not beat on constantly. We just don't know how to hit hard or when we try we get scolded by them and say sorry.

Those numbers don't exactly add up. Do the other 65% not count? They have unemployed in their districts, it isn't just dems who are unemployed.

Even if the bill had to include cuts for the wealthiest it could be for one year not two and the estate tax is just weird that it was even included. Make Work Pay is more effective for the lowest paid than a SS tax break which is just an open door to future cuts in SS when they do get serious about the deficit next year. This nearly trillion dollars will have to be paid for and the middle class will be doing most of the paying so the tax cuts right now are just like free candy. You need to take the pounds off later and the more you gain the harder and longer the diet will be.

[Clio the Leo]

13. We couldn't shame them when they were in the minority, we wont be able to do it in January. nt

[TheCowsCameHome]

15. They cannot be shamed. The have no human characteristics.

[emulatorloo]

16. They can't be shamed. All they care about is power and taking care of the Rich

They have no interest in governing or doing "what's right" for the majority of the American people.

[ladjf]

17. Shame isn't the issue. The question is how would they calculate

their future political position as a result of permanently denying help to those in need?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. Good Question

They want to wreck the economy, blame President Obama for the carnage, and defeat him in 012.

The ironic thing is that this compromise, flawed as it is, might have enough juice to ensure it doesn't happen. Irony isn't just a word in the dictionary.

[phleshdef]

30. They won't even consider it. They've denied it countless times and gotten rewarded for it.

[ladjf]

31. Even though they have denied help during the previous two years

that doesn't mean that they would again during the next two years. However, there is no limit to their greed.

[bushisanidiot]

20. [phone]

all the repukes want is for Obama to FAIL. i believe that anything the republicans put up for a vote, even the bill that the president is proposing, will actually be voted down by the repukes because they don't want to give him a "win" on anything. that being said, this bill has the best chance of actually getting through than anything the democrats have come up with so far.

if taxes go up on Jan. 1st., we lose. the poor and middle class will blame the President, Speaker Pelosi, and Senator Reid for everything. it's that simple.

we cannot let king solomon cut the baby in half. SOMEONE has to stand up for the poor and middle class.. even if (god forbid) it means helping the rich.

[Life Long Dem]

24. So much for letting the repubs take the rap.

I haven't heard a word from the media about the S.S COLA or the 9/11 firefighters fund.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

25. That's Part Of The Problem

.

[Beetwasher]

26. Exactly, Which Is Why "LET Them Vote Against UI And Face The Public Backlash!!!" Is Such Bullshit

The public is not informed properly of what's happened and who is responsible for it. In fact, they are maliciously misinformed about it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. The COLA Increase Cost $13 Billion And The First Responder Fund Cost $7 Billion

They wouldn't even support that.

[Kweli4Real]

27. The interesting thing about this thread is ...

Everyone (well, almost, everyone) agrees that the republicans cannot be shamed into voting for U/C or anything that does not advance their narrow interests. We also agree (if only tacitly) that in order to pass the things we want, we must give them some of what they want. We also agree that what we have to lose is far more important to us than what they have to lose means to them.

So why are we still seeing people whining about capitulation? Is this an example of dots not being connected?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. Capitulation

They don't like capitulation. Neither do I but capitulation is a tactic like retreat and not a strategy. Did not the Americans retreat from the Philippines and a bunch of other islands to win them back another day.

I see this as a tactical retreat similar to the surrender of the Philippines...

[GOTV]

34. If they can't be shamed, what forced them to make all those terrific concessions Obama claimed ...

... were in there?

Obama says the GOP can be moved.

If they can be moved greater force will move them farther.

[CTyankee]

35. Read Paul Krugman in the NYT today. Basically, we got a lousy deal politically.

Take a good look, this is the last you'll see of middle class tax cuts or extension of UI benefits.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. Because They Got Tax Cuts For Their Buddies

It was an appeal to their darker angels not their lighter ones,

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. They Weren't Shamed. They Were Bribed.

Big difference.

[quaker bill]

38. Any notion

That the republicans can be shamed needs to be dropped from any serious discussion of policy.

Any notion that Republicans feel even modestly interested in acting toward the common good or best interests of the country as a whole needs to be dropped from any serious discussion of policy.

Any notion that Republicans will be held accountable by their voters for a failure to act in the public interest, or for the failure of the policies they pass to be legal and beneficial, needs to be dropped from any serious discussion of policy.

[RBInMaine]

40. And yet some fools think they can be shamed into voting for tax cuts JUST for the middle class which

they have already voted against.

[quaker bill]

43. They have no sense of shame

it is therefore impossible to invoke it.

They are not held accountable for their actions. If they truly were, few would be in office anywhere.

They do not fear us or their supporters. They have not delivered peace, freedom, economic growth, jobs, better pay, smaller government, or even the more "moral society" that they say they intend, none of it. They never will, because they do not have to in order to be elected.

All they need to do is pass out the candy out to their corporate sponsors. This they will continue to do, for as long as there is any left.

[Left of the Left]

44. Well

they've already extended UI 5 times, and Cobourne(?) even said they'd do it again without the deal.

As to the taxcuts, it wouldnt be shame, it's politics. Theres a difference between being the minority party blocking something that hasnt happened yet, and controlling half of congress and against middle class taxcuts by fighting for taxcuts for the rich.

Bill Clinton didnt shame them in the gov shutdown, he won the political argument.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. The Democrats Extended It Five Times

The last time they expired in July, the unemployed went five weeks without benefits because the Dems had to wait for Joe Manchin to be sworn it to replace the departed Robert Byrd. They had to wait because they could only get two Repugs to vote with them.