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
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: I don't understand why some DU members show support for the FACTS that ... [View all]Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)50. because a corrupt shell of a labor party uses the fig leaf of "governing"
to vote for policies that damage working people.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
333 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
I don't understand why some DU members show support for the FACTS that ... [View all]
Scuba
Jan 2015
OP
You think they didn't try? If they pushed for that I bet we wouldn' have any health care program at
Maraya1969
Jan 2015
#282
You are forgetting Joe Lieberman, again. He was the INDEPENDENT who voted for the ACA
pnwmom
Jan 2015
#106
Are you sure that a bill passed by reconciliation is subject to the 60 vote Cloture rule?
merrily
Jan 2015
#214
Yea but it took a lot of time and fancy dance steps to get there. Doesn't anyone
Maraya1969
Jan 2015
#283
Why were his chairs not removed for that act of treason to the party who welcomed him back AFTER
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#122
Why did you say that the ACA was passed with only Dem votes when you knew that was false?
pnwmom
Jan 2015
#182
Lieberman was given special privileges in order to support Dems. Why did you not point that out?
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#221
That didn't make him a Dem. It helped the Dems much of the time, but not with the ACA.
pnwmom
Jan 2015
#224
You've already been told, his vote wasn't needed. The ACA was passed, by what LIBERALS had
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#236
Yeah, I've already been told a LIE. His vote was needed, because the only bill that could be passed
pnwmom
Jan 2015
#239
Not to mention that he campaigned in 2008 for Peter King and Susan Collins! n/t
markpkessinger
Jan 2015
#262
Everyone LOVES to forget Max Baucus, the Democrat that had Single Payer
nationalize the fed
Jan 2015
#161
He wasn't a Dem any longer, he was a bitter Independent who remained so he could throw
pnwmom
Jan 2015
#212
I agree that the less Dems are like the RW, the better, which is exactly why I oppose Third Wayers
merrily
Jan 2015
#305
Third Way is a Think Tank and they are far from being Democrats. How do we know?
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#317
I'm not following you. The process is supposed to be about the PEOPLE who hire
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#320
"Too bad we didn't know about them when they first started implementing their agenda in our party."
merrily
Jan 2015
#323
So this is really about "some here" calling Hillary a Third Wayer, not the post of mine re the ACA?
merrily
Jan 2015
#318
When Ted Kennedy died, he was replaced by an appointee who would have voted as Ted wanted.
merrily
Jan 2015
#184
"Why it continues to be framed as a refusal to understand when it is a difference of opinion ..."
Scuba
Jan 2015
#213
The White House never bothered contacting Joe Lieberman asking him to support the public option.
pa28
Jan 2015
#330
Yeah but we only had it a short while and like the blue dogs fucked things up....
Autumn
Jan 2015
#2
I like the fantasy put forth that electing more dems will make congress more liberal.
KG
Jan 2015
#4
+ 1. Yep. That's basically what that poster is advocating. Cleverly, of course. eom
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#129
Electing Democrats is a great idea. And that is what we intend to do from now on.
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#322
Why don't we give them a choice and find our? A Republican running against a
A Simple Game
Jan 2015
#74
You assume that most voters in red districts want a super-progressive Democrat
YoungDemCA
Jan 2015
#144
Super duper liberal on steroids? Why stop at "super" progressive, whatever the
merrily
Jan 2015
#225
The progressives didn't have control. The Blue Damn Dogs voted with Repubs
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#86
You are still talking about perception. Talk about results. We are sinking into economic mire,
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#92
What keeps me awake is knowing that there are those that will vote for anyone
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#171
Interesting that some seem to continue the meme that progressives don't vote.
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#197
Do you understand why some "Democrats" disparage the left by claiming that they don't vote?
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#219
You're not supposed to complain about the size of your crumbs, or you'll get Republicans!
Scuba
Jan 2015
#222
It's all about authoritarianism. People are raised to totally trust authority. That's why parents
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#269
My point was trying to answer why some would settle for ACA instead of single payer or a public
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#267
I was not faulting you or your post in any way. I'd been wondering as I was reading down the thread
merrily
Jan 2015
#275
No. Everyone who says that seems also to say no one has a chance at winning except HRC.
merrily
Jan 2015
#229
One of the most important decisions made in the last bunch of decades was the
rhett o rick
Jan 2015
#163
Not to mention that there are tools like the filibuster and personal holds that the minority Rs used
jwirr
Jan 2015
#93
call them DINOs if you want but those are the ones that gave us control of chambers & committees
MrMickeysMom
Jan 2015
#168
Is delusional the word of the week? Cause y'all sure are using it all over the place.
Autumn
Jan 2015
#23
Nice. I wasn't even aware his approval rating has hit 50%, he should have a high approval rating.
Autumn
Jan 2015
#147
And who would know that better than Scuba who does it all the time, eh, Scuba? eom
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#154
Oh by the way since you brought up Obamas approval rating. It has been rumored that he's going
Autumn
Jan 2015
#155
Not bad for a third-way, Republican-lite, right-of-center President Obama, eh? eom
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#169
After his speech where he's going to push for these Liberal populist goals what do you think?
Autumn
Jan 2015
#172
He has already been talking them up. January 9 was the start, I think. From Air Force 1, no less.
merrily
Jan 2015
#237
Yes, we were told it was the fault of the Blue Dogs. Then when the voters said, 'okay then, let's
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#73
Everyone overlooks that pesky little fact that not one puke voted for the ACA but it was passed
Autumn
Jan 2015
#82
Of course not. They will change the rules, as Dems should have done while they had the chance.
sabrina 1
Jan 2015
#125
mostly they've moved on to just writing OPs about how "true Democrats" are okay with X and Y
MisterP
Jan 2015
#193
Republicans always get what they want. That is Rule #1 for the past 30 years.
world wide wally
Jan 2015
#10
National politics in the US is akin to pro wrestling; opponents huff and puff yet share a beer...
1bigdude
Jan 2015
#13
Democratic socialism drastically improves the lives of all, including the rich...but the rich dont
NoJusticeNoPeace
Jan 2015
#33
How did they obstruct when we had the House, a super-majority in the Senate and the White House?
Scuba
Jan 2015
#30
And do you think the perpetual outraged congregating under this thread care about those facts?
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#141
We had a filibuster-proof super-majority in the Senate for all of 24 working days.
SunSeeker
Jan 2015
#121
The ACA was based on the Massachusetts plan passed by a liberal legislature, vetoed by Romney then
pampango
Jan 2015
#26
No. It's actually health care reform, too. I'm surprised you don't know that. eom
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#187
Oh you like me, that doesn't surprise me at all. Obama called it insurance finance reform
Autumn
Jan 2015
#190
Because a lot of other countries operate with Linux or Unix or Windows 8.1. We use Vista.
BlueJazz
Jan 2015
#29
Excuses. Bush never had such control of Congress, yet he got almost everything he wanted.
Scuba
Jan 2015
#35
because a corrupt shell of a labor party uses the fig leaf of "governing"
Warren Stupidity
Jan 2015
#50
How on earth is passing what you ran on and voters elected you to pass obstructing and anti-
merrily
Jan 2015
#235
Republicans blocked Meiers and he did get Roberts and Alito who are younger and therefore worse
merrily
Jan 2015
#241
My thoughts exactly. Can we let Republicans do the re-writing of history to bash Obama? Please.
Fred Sanders
Jan 2015
#44
You're joking, right? (No, you're just out to bash Democrats come hell or high water)
frazzled
Jan 2015
#57
Exactly, iandhr.. I'm glad you were helped by having Obamacare as many many others have been and
Cha
Jan 2015
#70
I don't remember the Democrats having a super majority in the House in recent years
George II
Jan 2015
#60
Oh you with your documented facts. Hush now. You're liable to burst bubbles.
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#191
The fact is, all democrats aren't in agreement when it comes to healthcare and fiscal policy. nt
ecstatic
Jan 2015
#68
Perhaps your narrow reading of history is a convenient half truth for your warp view of history
Johonny
Jan 2015
#72
Mahalo Johonny for the info.. Like VP Biden said about ACA.. it's a BFD. Working for our country
Cha
Jan 2015
#97
we had a skin-of-the-teeth "supermajority" for like 2 months, which included Lieberman
yodermon
Jan 2015
#84
Seems to me the real question everyone dances around is this: is a Blue Dog in a red
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#194
There's much of substance in your post and I'm afraid I may be too much of a
KingCharlemagne
Jan 2015
#279
Thank you. I was not looking for your answers. As I said, they were rhetorial, food for
merrily
Jan 2015
#295
If that's all you think we got, you must either have been living under a rock
NYC Liberal
Jan 2015
#96
People who claim to dislike President Obama because he didn't push for single-payer always
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#150
I'm for single-payer, too, but I don't want to wait 15-30 years for it to happen
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#162
A surprise for the irrational to realize that other people may extrapolate and interpret facts...
LanternWaste
Jan 2015
#126
It's because for all but 24 days, Dems didn't have a super-majority in the Senate.
BlueCaliDem
Jan 2015
#145
As other posters have noted upthread, there never was a "super-majority" during Obama's term
YoungDemCA
Jan 2015
#148
Good. It's time DU members and other Democratic voters start holding elected Democrats accountable.
Scuba
Jan 2015
#226
I got thouroughly disgusted in 2007 when they voted to keep funding the Iraq War.
Fuddnik
Jan 2015
#245
You said "Isn't the Democratic Party supposed to do us better than that? How can one be a
Progressive dog
Jan 2015
#259
Many are still going bankrupt because of medical bills and generic prescription prices are going
liberal_at_heart
Jan 2015
#281
Absolutely. Most of us are disgusted. The rest double-down on 3rd way trickle-down.
whereisjustice
Jan 2015
#274
I never mentioned the length of the super majority, which, by the way, was more than 27 days ...
Scuba
Jan 2015
#297
Any comment on Democratic Party ineffectiveness while holding a simple majority? December 2014?
Scuba
Jan 2015
#301
Interesting. To me this is less about Obama than the Democratic Party in Washington as a whole.
Scuba
Jan 2015
#308
"Supermajority" means 60 plus real Dems in the Senate. We did not have that.
McCamy Taylor
Jan 2015
#292
facts under obama meant we needed a filibuster proof majority + franken was not sworn in for months.
pansypoo53219
Jan 2015
#293
Any comment on Democratic Party ineffectiveness while holding a simple majority? December 2014?
Scuba
Jan 2015
#302