Stop politicizing the oversight job of the House.

[Baitball Blogger]

It's their job to impeach if the facts are there. If the House doesn't impeach it sets a bad precedent. It says that they will buckle if the other side is too powerful to overcome. Where did we see this before, just this week? Jeffrey Epstein was too powerful for Alexander Acosta, so Acosta buckled.

Sometimes, you just have to do the right thing for the sake of the history books. Let history judge the Republican Senate badly. Why should we legitimize their bad judgment?

[delisen]

1. If we have the facts, the House must act

Impeachment is a political process not just a legal process. The House must not pre-judge whether the Senate will vote to convict or not.

We are dealing with Justice at its highest level-the level of the Ideal, which entails our faith in democracy as a way of life. To ignore the Ideal of Justice merely because we think the present place-holders in Senate will not rise to the Ideal of Justice is unworthy.

The House must impeach if the evidence is compelling; the senate must face its own moment of decision.

[llmart]

2. +1,000

[Scarsdale]

8. Exactly.

Or else explain WHY they refuse to do the right thing. Are they compromised by Russia and the money? I think the answer is obvious. Ryan is cutting and running, hoping to get off free. McConnell has to stay and face the music. Surely he is not THAT powerful that he can destroy an action sorely needed by the entire country to save democracy? The gop knew how damaged as a human being tRump was and is. Protecting him is proving how little they regard the citizens of this country.

[bitterross]

5. Is my sarcasm detector broken?

You said:

Impeachment is a political process not just a legal process. The House must not pre-judge whether the Senate will vote to convict or not.

If we are not to politicize the job of the House, then how do we support a "political process" by them? If it is a "political process" and politics must be considered, then how do we not consider the political ramifications of a protracted series of hearings that lead to no conviction in the Senate? That would certainly give rise to the 45 Cult being able to say Trump was found innocent of collusion while they support him throughout the 2020 campaign.

Don't forget how Clinton's political impeachment raised the level of support for him.

[Butterflylady]

9. Trump does not,

By any judgement even comes close to Bill Clinton. Clinton had a soul, a heart and most of all, intelligence. He worked for the people and the people knew it. That's why the majority stood behind him.


He majority of this nation will stand behind orange face. They know now who this who he really is and the majority want him gone

[bitterross]

12. I agree with you about Clinton vs. Trump.

The sad fact is there is a cult of Trump that remains willfully ignorant of Trump's character and deeds. I have no faith they will come around to reality no matter what evidence is presented. They have remained steadfast supporters despite the plethora of evidence already in the public domain.

If Clinton's foundation had received 30 subpoenas on 255 pages they'd be screaming for impeachment. When that happened to Trump's foundation they didn't even bat an eye.

You're making the mistake of believing these people will all of a sudden become rational and logical. I don't see that happening. I see them doubling-down. It will hurt them mentally, emotionally to admit they are wrong.

The majority did not want him as President, but yet, there he is. We do not actually live in a Democracy.

[MyOwnPeace]

54. I'm of the same mind......

regarding the fact that it is wrong to think that the "Trumpsters" will all-of-a-sudden awaken and become rational and logical. Like their hero, being rational and logical is not of their world...............

[delisen]

13. I think you raise very important points.

My reading of impeachment law leads me to believe that if Trump engaged in an impeachable crime for which he cannot be charged and tried by the Judiciary while he is sitting president, then the House should impeach. The impeachment does not have to be nor should it be a fraught emotional undertaking. The facts should be presented and the impeachment put to a vote. If the vote is to impeach then it should be sent to the Senate for trial.

The role of the House is then ended except for its role in the next stage of Impeachment which is entirely up to the Senate which has to decide whether to try. If they have received Articles of Impeachment, they have a decision to make . In the meantime the House goes about the rest of its business-which is going to be considerable-unless and until the Senate decides how it will proceed.

If the Senate does not proceed, Trump may still be subject to trial by the Judiicial branch once he is out of office - subject to the statute of limitations.

I don't for certain know whether the Senate must proceed to trial once it has the Articles of Impeachement or whether there is a double Jeopardy issue wherein the House may consider that it is best to not impeach but instead rely upon Trump leaving office and then be subject to prosecution in the Judiciary branch.

[llmart]

16. The 45 cult is not very large despite what the media tries to portray them as.

As another poster wrote on DU, it's probably closer to 22%. President Clinton had a lot of support for his presidency and the vast majority of the public thought what two consenting adults did didn't rise to the level of criminality.

What the Dump family was/is involved in jeopardizes our democracy and is criminal on so many levels.

The cultists will think Dump is innocent no matter what he does, such as "shooting someone on Fifth Avenue".

[bitterross]

18. The GOP Senators are still afraid of them. Still involved in the conspiracy.

Two things are still true. 1. The GOP Senators are still afraid to buck Trump and anger his base. They didn't lose seats in the mid-terms. 2. Many of them are likely also compromised by the Russian conspiracy and fraud.

Those two things will keep them from voting to convict and remove Trump.

[MyOwnPeace]

55. THAT is probably

the most telling fact regarding how the Senate would act. The senators are afraid of him, and of their voters. Yes, the majority voted "against" IQ45 by 3 million votes, but the "system" still put him in the White House.
No matter how "right" the may believe they are, they don't have the balls to stand up against him and the voters back home.

[Baitball Blogger]

19. The Mueller investigation is almost over, so the House will get the facts as they get started.

The Clinton investigation was a witch hunt from the beginning. We won't see that kind of messy, pundit driven shit-show.

[AndJusticeForSome]

26. Great protest slogan: "We have the facts! The House must act!" nt

[MyOwnPeace]

56. Good one!

I thought I was watching another session of the OJ trial!

"If the glove don't fit you must acquit!"

[brooklynite]

44. "The House must not pre-judge whether the Senate will vote to convict or not. "

Hod did that work out in 1998?

[KelleyKramer]

52. It worked out pretty much exactly as you would expect impeaching a president for a bj would work out

[dlk]

3. I Trust Nancy Pelosi

She has never let us down.

[Baitball Blogger]

7. Well, except for that time when she said there

Would not be an investigation of the Bush Iraq thingie.

[lame54]

11. The statement "Impeachment is off the table." was a...

Huge disappointment
It's one thing to not do it
But, to announce it?
That gave Bush/Cheney a green light to carry on

[Baitball Blogger]

20. Precisely.

And we're still dealing with reverberations of that bad decision, because the Right has been able to insert the idea that they are entitled to break the laws. Trump was the natural result of that inaction.

[betsuni]

32. Bernie Sanders on impeachment: "Jumping the gun does nobody any good. ... You don't want

to make it a partisan issue." Evidence of collusion is necessary. Announcing something everybody knows, so what.

[Nitram]

6. I strongly disagree. If there is no chance the Senate will vote to impeach it is a waste of taxpayer

dollars, and will weaken the Democratic Party. Like it or not, politics are involved in EVERY action in government. Democracy doesn't function without politics. Politics are the way people make compromises and negotiate good outcomes. The word "politics" like the word "liberal" has acquired a negative connotation that does not accurately convey what the word really means. If a decision is made to ignore the law and the Constitution "purely" on POLITICAL grounds, that is bad. But politics will always be involved decisions because the political process is how empathy and other non-legal values are factored into decision-making.

[Baitball Blogger]

10. It's time the Democratic Party stands for something.

They should stand for justice, instead of allowing the Republicans to lower the bar. And I couldn’t give two shits about appeasing their supporters. These people, in our daily lives shut us up and shut us out as if we’re stirring up the pot too much for their weak sensibilities. And then, all it takes is a Trey Gowdy to come along to turn them into a hate mob on some factless cause. No sir. The Democratic Party is at a turning point. Act now or you will be led from behind by the Ocasios in the party.

[Nitram]

29. Wrong. You've got some nice slogans and bumper stickers. Those don't win elections, and they don't

bring about change. Why is it not Justice to let Mueller complete a full investigation into the crimes of Trump and Co, and then prosecute/impeach them all? You have a very narrow view of Justice.

[Baitball Blogger]

37. We're fighting on the same side.

Perfectly fine to wait until Mueller hands a report to the incoming Dem House. Which should be soon.

[betsuni]

33. Talking point: The Democratic Party doesn't stand for anything.

[GulfCoast66]

46. Nice to know you think the Democratic Party stands for nothing

Led from behind. LOL.

[Nasruddin]

14. I agree

Impeachment is a failed instrument. It has never been successfully deployed against the president or vice president, and we have had some other doozies.

It's very difficult to make a principled stand out of it because of both-siderism.

If there is still smoke coming from this furnace, focus efforts on his shady business family and his nightmarishly incompetent and corrupt appointees. Keep picking the bad ones off. They aren't protected by any quasi-constitutional immunity. Maybe some of the particularly bad ones could be impeached. Maybe if they don't like the heat, they'll take care of the problem for us with a 25th amendment play. Otherwise, the chaos will keep him bottled up. Bad for us and bad for the country but in his case, ineffective inaction is better than action.

It's a bad system and needs some constitutional remedies. Start by separating the executive from the law enforcement functions, and making sure candidates can't run (or at least, take office) without full financial and medical disclosure. There's lots more that needs to be done, but prevention is usually more effective than after the fact cure.

[think4yourself]

17. There have only been two impeachments,

Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. I wouldn’t say it is a failed instrument. Most of the things in my garage don’t work the first two times I try to use them!

[Nitram]

30. Impeachment is not "a failed instrument." It requires a majority of both houses. If it didn't,

Obama would have been impeached and removed from office. Let Mueller lay the evidence on the table and then we'll pull out all stops. Impatience is a characteristic of the young and inexperienced.

[Texin]

15. I think McConnell is hoping for exactly that: for the Dems to be judged by the electorate,

and to come short in a rout in 2020. A large swath of the population is feeling Mueller fatigue. The staunch allies of Shitler are holding fast and will never abandon him, regardless of what is uncovered. Impeachment proceedings - and I fully agree that they should be undertaken - will not be viewed well with the majority of Americans. We are nowhere near the same people we were as a nation during Watergate. I expect that the Dems would face considerable backlash from the voters* and we all could wind up with a rethuglican sweep, with Donny Small Hands sitting ugly as Tsar of Western Russia for the rest of his motherfucking life.

The best outcome we ought to be wishing for is for Shitler and his entire crime family entourage to go on a long vacation, say to Andorra, and never return. Just getting him out of the WH would be enough for me. Do I want them punished? You betcha. I just am not at all optimistic about the chance for that to happen through the legal process so long as he is pResident* since Barr has stated that he doesn't believe a sitting POTUS* can be indicted. He agrees with the DOJ policy memo (which, of course, is not law or even mentioned in the Constitution). Sure, Donny Small Hands can be indicted and prosecuted by the SDNY at some future point, but would he be? We can't know that.

[Baitball Blogger]

22. We will appear weak if we don't do our jobs.

But, that's how the Democrats have been viewed since Lieberman's time. Maybe that's the reason there are younger Democrats demanding that the older ones move aside?

[GulfCoast66]

47. So Obama was weak. Got it.

And the yong ones can demand till the cows come home. Let me know when they have the votes to move the older ones aside. I kind of like the older ones.

[Baitball Blogger]

57. Obama was not perfect. He should have gone after Bush II and Cheney and that would have rectified

some very wrong-minded views that the Right held that incentivized their supporters. Failing to do so even plagued his own administration, not to mention that it set the stage for the back channeling bullshit that created a Trump Administration. In other words, Obama was not on the offensive, which is why, politically, he was rolled over on issues like appointing a judge to the Supreme Court, and why he didn't have a foundation established to flip-off Mitch McConnell when he wouldn't stand by his side to tell us about a Russian threat. That's how I see it.

And, I understand that part of the reason for the choices Obama made might have been due because he was not connecting directly with those of us who would have stood by his side on this issue. Jesus, we would have been fierce supporters. Obama was perfect in every other way.

However, the lesson that I see that we should heed from that time: If your will is not strong enough to fight for the justice that you believe is owed to you, don't expect others to view your decision to step away from the estocada as anything but a sign of weakness. No argument professing that you did it because of high ideals is going to make a difference to them, because you have already taken yourself out of the equation in their perceptions. They will judge you by your actions, not by the reasons you give them. And, they will assume that we really didn't think that what Trump did was bad, that he really could kill someone in Time's square and the only thing the Dems will do is a collective Scream. No big deal, from their point of view because they have their own mob to drown us out.

I have to laugh because I know the Dem leadership's next move. They are all going to ask us to start playing nice and help mend the divide in this country, because, lord, we haven't been slapped in the face enough by the Right. The Right are not concerned about civility, in case anyone has failed to notice. The leadership might say a thing or two about it, but we really should be paying attention to what they do, not what they say.

[GulfCoast66]

63. Suffice to say I think you are off base with several of you beliefs.

[Baitball Blogger]

64. Your concern is duly noted.

[betsuni]

51. "that's how the Democrats have been viewed since Lieberman's time."

What does this even mean?

[Baitball Blogger]

60. To pretend it's a novel idea is disingenuous

?w=293

[Ponietz]

21. Thank you for wading into the breach

The hate machine will attack our Democratic leaders starting in January. There is no limit to their perfidy. Imagine if one, or several, Roger Stone knock-offs invent a scandal involving Pelosi. Do we expect that the NYT, CBS, et al., to fairly report it?

They will continue to slander and destroy the reputations of honest public servants, use the coming recession, government largesse, war, martial law, or whatever else it takes to change the narrative and protect their Russian puppet. Treason/RICO are at the heart of it. We don’t negotiate with traitors and mobsters. People are dying. Fascists and white nationalists have itchy trigger fingers. I believe the best way to stop it is to shove it up the Republican Senate’s nose.

Some argue for addressing it at the ballot box in 2020. The ball is in our hands and we know, at some point, this malign specter must be addressed. We are not on defense. We are on offense. Any person who has played team sports knows what that means. We cannot prevail by allowing the clock to run out on *’s first term.

It is time to stand on principle and do what is right and just. Besides, I happen to believe that the FBI, the intelligence agencies and, ultimately, the military, have our backs. I am not sure for how long, though.

[Nitram]

31. The hate machine has never for one minute stopped attacking Democratic leaders and candidates.

With a majority we will subpoena, investigate, legislate, and block the President's stupid gestures. Ignore the hate machine. They have lost credibility with everyone except hard core Trump supporters.

[Hortensis]

23. Or what, Baitball? If our leaders are far too smart

to do as clueless amateurs want, that's supposed to mean they've failed their duty?

You know they're going to move in their time, not yours. So what comes next, after they so obligingly "prove" their moral failure?

[Baitball Blogger]

24. They keep making the same weak decisions

Only to get challenged during the primaries by younger Dems. We have tried your way. It doesn’t work because it doesn’t give the right a reason to reflect. That’s the source of the two Americas. We are following different rules.

[Hortensis]

38. Baitball, we're a whole month out from the midterms.

Your strange "weak decisions" theme follows enormous success that proves it extremely wrong. The 240 (?) members of the 116th haven't even been sworn in yet, for god's sake.

Btw, all the decisions and the long, hard work you are seemingly unaware of, of many members who not only ran for reelection themselves but whose duties required them to travel the nation for the better part of 2 years advising, training and helping organize local candidates, had a great deal to do with electing those 240 Democrats across the nation.

Just a little sample of some of the caucus's movers and shakers who had a big hand in making the blue wave happen, so you can look them up. There are a bunch more who deserve respect and gratitude, but this'll help you start getting acquainted with some of the leaders you call weak decision makers.

Barbara Lee


Hakeem Jeffries


Katherine Clark


Ben Ray Lujan


Cheri Bustos


And here is a group portrait of our new 116th congress leadership team so you can look them all up before you continue this theme into the new year.

The incoming House Democratic leadership team poses for a group photo in the Rayburn Room in the U.S. Capitol on Friday. Front row, from left: Katherine M. Clark, D-Mass., Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., Steny H. Hoyer, D-Md., Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., James E. Clyburn, D-S.C., Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and Cheri Bustos, D-Ill. Back row, from left: Joe Neguse, D-Colo., Jamie Raskin, D-Md., Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., Ted Lieu, D-Calif., Debbie Dingell, D-Mich., David Cicilline, D-R.I., Matt Cartwright, D-Pa., Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., Barbara Lee, D-Calif., and Katie Hill, D-Calif.

Note that this official leadership team does not include some powerful committee chairs, who you probably should know also make decisions, weak or otherwise as the case may be.

[Baitball Blogger]

40. Fine people I am sure.

And a big reason they won was because they reached out to people who felt disconnected and alienated from the process. Now that they have been brought back into the fold, don’t lose them by following the same lame patterns.

[Hortensis]

41. Baitball, when people are asked how they're doing,

a vast majority at almost all walks of life say they're doing fine but others aren't. This is well established by a bunch of studies, and you can find actual numbers if you'd like to verify it. Needless to day, these perceptions can't both be true. This widespread misconception comes from being soaked in agitprop-flavored Kool-Aid.

Also, these leaders did not go turn over rocks until they found people who felt disconnected and alienated. They mostly reached out to the candidates themselves and helped them learn how to listen and talk to their constituents, how to zero in on and address the issues their constituents cared about, and gave them expensive data and other assets to work with.

You do no one any favors by portraying us all as a bunch of weak victims of weak decision makers. That not only does not describe me, but I can't imagine a single person I know signing on to that insulting picture.

I suggest rejecting victim mentality, for yourself and for all the others who think they're mostly doing fine and wouldn't appreciate being seen that way. To put it mildly, swallowing this poison whole is itself an extreme weakness that makes one a good victim.

[Baitball Blogger]

42. I don't think this is going anywhere, as far as a discussion is concerned.

To pretend that Democrats have failed to listen to their constituents since Lieberman's time is to deny hard facts. I'm not into that. If you want to say that something changed to bring on a blue wave, I would say yes. But now that we're here, don't slide back.

[GulfCoast66]

49. We have a large constituency. Not all agree with you.

You apparently see democrats as weak. There is our first disagreement.

A large majority of the people on DU define themselves as Progressive. I guarantee you a majority of Democrats in my state do not.

[Baitball Blogger]

58. The concept of Democrats as weak is not a novel.

?w=293

[Hortensis]

50. Hard facts? But you have none, Bait. Reality refutes your claims.

Even you refute your claim, for goodness sake. You don't believe you're a sheep who was 'brought into the fold" for a moment. And our party isn't made up of successfully herded sheep, but of a grand alliance of the many diverse peoples and personal interests who are America.

Wish I could say that what changed to bring on the blue wave was that our own rhetoric took on a wonderfully, magically convincing quality. What happened, though, is that more of the electorate finally started understanding what the Republicans have become. We gave those ready to change their own choices good candidates and issues they cared about to vote for, but that's what we do every election.

Btw, your statement "people disconnected and alienated from the process" is straight from the Republican and RT playbooks. Because deluding people into believing they have no good choice,that everyone is betraying them, not just their party, is the only way the Republicans can win.

Another major tactic is distracting those who lean left into forgetting they and their enormous threat to democracy even exist, because those of us who remember never turn our backs on them to shoot inward. Without successful distraction, the Republicans can't win.

[Baitball Blogger]

59. Stop trying to use the "Straight out of the Republican playbook" meme to diffuse my arguement

about alienation, because I am speaking about personal experience.

I was a no-party voter for most of my life because I couldn't see where I fit into the Democratic platform. I did as a child. It was very obvious up until the eighties. Up until then, I could see the Democratic party as a fighter for labor and the overlooked citizens in this country. But then, something happened and possibly it was when the Centrist movement/neo-liberal began to shake hands with the business interest. That's when it became very obvious that those of us that were once the main focus of the Democratic party became bargaining chips. The Democratic party lost its focus.

We most definitely got left behind. And I do say, "we," even though financially, my family is now in a bracket that benefits from financial incentives, whenever they make it to the Middle Class.

[GulfCoast66]

62. Yep. I'm waiting for the 'both parties are the same' to drop

You know it is coming.

[reflection]

25. Your last paragraph

Mirrors my line of thought exactly. What's right is right. If history books are not rewritten by these vermin, this will be the moment that everyone alive today is judged against. In know what side I want to be on, and I want the Democratic party to be on the right side of history also. It's binary. Few things are, in my opinion. Usually there's shades of gray, but not now. Whatever we can do to put sunlight between good people and this traitorous president and party that supports him, I'm for.

[Snackshack]

27. Simply put...

If the criteria for impeachment is met the House must impeach Trump no matter what the Senate does. This is not about politics it is about whether or not this country is a country of laws that no one is above. If the House does not uphold this basic principle that was integral to the founding of this nation then we are lost.

[Strelnikov_]

34. . . and . .

any political blow back, of which there seems to be much angst, will be minimal to non-existent if the Democrats forward articles of impeachment involving serious crimes. A majority saw through the Clinton charade. With Trump, I have no doubt that a real investigation will uncover crimes that the vast majority of the populace will view as impeachable offenses.

[Snackshack]

35. I hope you are right

That there is a point where the type of crimes committed outweigh the hate we see today and country will come before party affiliation. I am not sanguine about that however. I think Trump was correct when he said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose support. Regardless the Dems have to impeach if the standard is met. Either way we will be changed irrevocably as a nation.

[elfin]

28. I trust Pelosi to judge all the variables and then decide how to proceed. nt

[Garrett78]

36. Impeachment without a conviction is not meaningless, as some are claiming.

Furthermore, there wouldn't simply be a vote for or against. Impeachment is a process, a process that would entail putting forth evidence. A lot of evidence in this case.

And, as you said and as I've said and as many have said, for the House to not do their constitutional duty sets a dangerous precedent.

It's absurd to basically say, "The Republicans are so corrupt that we don't dare try holding them accountable for their corruption." Let the court of public opinion determine the consequences for inaction.

It's just as absurd to compare Trump to Bill Clinton. For one thing, Clinton lied about having an extramarital affair, whereas Trump is the most criminal president in US history. Secondly, Clinton already had a high approval rating, unlike Trump.

[PufPuf23]

39. If Trump is not impeached, I predict there will be another GOP POTUS

after the 2020 election. Doubt if Trump will want to run again. If Trump is not impeached he will likely skate on his crimes.

The DU folks speaking against impeachment are wrong, the situation is not analogous to Bill Clinton. I truly don't get their thoughts.

The only real problem I have against Nancy Pelosi is the announcement (followed by no action) that "Impeachment" is off the table regards GWB (and Cheney). That failure caused the harm to the country and Democratic Party that lead to many bad things including Trump in the position of POTUS. The World will look ever more down on the USA should Trump not be removed from office. We just can't be trusted.

[Baitball Blogger]

45. Agree with all your points. Every non-action creates opportunity.

The Dem leadership is responsible for the way Republican behavior gets worse every generation. The Repubs know there are no hard consequences because the Democrats are not willing to play hardball with them.

It's like raising a child who never faces discipline. Don't be surprised if one day you find yourself sleeping with one eye open.

[GulfCoast66]

65. You realize you just blamed republican actions on Democrats?

You whole meme is ridiculous. Self loathing is what it sounds like to me.

Apparently, because democrats have not taken the actions you want, despite the fact many democrats disagree with you, it is all democrats fault republicans do such shitty things.

If only we had listened to you!

[Baitball Blogger]

66. I don't agree with your framing of my response.

When you have to attack me instead of my position it means you have run out of any useful retort.

[GulfCoast66]

67. But you whole 'position' is an attack on democratic leaders

All I have read are laments about the things we have not done, despite us being in the minority and having no power to stop republicans.

You criticized Obama’s efforts to get his Supreme Court nominees in even though the republicans we never going to let that happen. Ever. But somehow that is the faults of democrats.

Name some concrete policy actions we could take and a discussion might be possible. Otherwise you are just making comments from the cheap seats.

[Baitball Blogger]

68. I am so sorry you are taking this so personally.

It is not going to improve the party if their members can’t accept criticism. It’s a big party and they have to start listening to the voices that they customarily push aside. I,e. Progressive voices, minority voices. This discussion was about the reasons that the House should impeach. I have made it obvious that I feel they have a duty to do so if there is cause. And I am confident that Mueller will deliver the evidence in a report that will be completed by the time the next House session begins. Everything else about your comments is just noise to distract from a valid position.

[brooklynite]

43. No - it's not

It's their OPTION is the facts are there. But since Impeachment is a political action, it's essential that they consider whether the Senate will convict.

[JonLP24]

48. Lindsay Graham voted to impeach Clinton

Maybe we can count on him this time around.

[betsuni]

53. Nice anti-Democratic talking points!

Pelosi didn't investigate the "Bush thingie"; "Trump was the natural result of that inaction."
The Democratic Party stands for nothing.
"Act now or you will be led from behind." Young good, old bad.
Democrats have appeared weak since Lieberman's time.
Democratic leaders make weak decisions, are weak.
People are "disconnected and alienated from the process"; Democrats have "failed to listen to their constituents since Lieberman's time."
"The Democratic leadership is responsible for the way Republican's behavior gets worse every generation."

LIEBERMAN!!!!! *shakes fist*

[Baitball Blogger]

61. We are not going to improve unless you can take criticism.

I stand by everything I've said, because it's the truth.