Capitulation by Democrats in name only.

[rjones2818]

This was posted at DailyKos just after the House passed the FISA capitulation bill. Here't the link to the original:

www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/4/221427/6809

From Dictionary.com, here's some definitions for capitulation:

1. the act of capitulating.

2. the document containing the terms of a surrender.

3. a list of the headings or main divisions of a subject; a summary or enumeration.

4. Often, capitulations. a treaty or agreement by which subjects of one country residing or traveling in another are extended extraterritorial rights or special privileges, esp. such a treaty between a European country and the former Ottoman rulers of Turkey.

Some things to consider after the fold:

Lincoln (D) Yes
Pryor (D) Yes
Feinstein (D) Yes
Salazar (D) Yes
Carper (D) Yes
Nelson (D) Yes
Inouye (D) Yes
Bayh (D) Yes
Landrieu (D) Yes
Mikulski (D) Yes
Klobuchar (D) Yes
McCaskill (D) Yes
Nelson (D) Yes
Conrad (D) Yes
Casey (D) Yes
Webb (D) Yes

These are the 16 senators who chose to capitulate on the FISA bill last night.

Of the 233 Democratic members of the House, only 181 members voted against the FISA capitulation bill. That means that there were 52 Democrats who either voted for the capitulation bill or chose not to vote.

For those who voted for this bill, I personally will give no support for them. As far as I'm concerned:

1) They are Democrats in name only. They should be thrown out of the party. This isn't purity, this is about allowing the government to spy on it's own people. Period. If they choose to let this corrupt and criminal administration spy on us, they should join the party that supports such actions.

2) We don't have a majority in either house of Congress. We should start today by running Democrats and progressives against each person calling themselves Democrats in the primaries, and as independents as the case may be (I think some congressional candidates are still selected by convention rather than primaries in some states).

3) We shouldn't support the national Democratic fundraising organizations. We have ActBlue and similar ways of supporting true Democrats. Supporting the national Democratic organizations allows some of our monies to go to people who are Democrats in name only. If the Democratic Progessive Caucus wishes to set up a fundraising arm in lieu of the general national party fundraising apparatus, and it pledges not to dontate to Democrats in name only, then I would support such a fundraising arm.

4) We need to realize that a D next to a person's name doesn't automatically make them progressive or make them fit for support from progressives. I support the Democratic Party being a progressive party, I'll even support moderate Democrats. I will not support Democrats in name only that choose to support the current administration. It looks like none of our presidential candidates supported this capitulation, so I'll be able to support whoever wins in the current nominating cycle.

The fun from the 2006 elections was an illusion. We've seen it before and hoped it wasn't true, but the last two days should shatter any illusions we had. It's time to work for a Democratic Party that stands for the people of this country. I think we've had a good start, but we're not nearly as far along as we thought we were.

Update: Changed 178 to 181 Dems voting against the bill.

[Ian David]

1. I wonder if Bush's veiled threat, "How's your boy" had something to do with Webb's decision.

"How's your boy? Be a shame if something... happened to him..."

[liberalmike27]

2. wow

This disgusts me. It goes way back to the "war on drugs," and how ineffectual Democrats have become at even trying to make an opposing argument. The only other thing it could be is that they actually want to keep on making us yet another Soviet Block country, where we are all under constant surveillance, just like they were back then. How different is it?

I never felt bad about it, but it makes my constant voting for third parties seem a lot more sensible. Truly a Democratic Party whose only differences are on stupid issues like guns, abortion, and stem-cell research is not a democratic party at all, is it? I hate that we have no populism anymore, we allow this free-trade, which is raping our country of its best developments in the last 70 years. It's sad, it makes me sad that I have no one to vote for, and that once again, it seems the media is choosing Hillary and Obama, and almost totally ignoring all other candidates who have actual, valid democratic positions.

[fasttense]

3. So you call it capitulation, I call it kowtowing.

From Merriam & Webster, to Kowtow:
1 : to show obsequious deference : FAWN
2 : to kneel and touch the forehead to the ground in token of homage, worship, or deep respect.
Etymology: Chinese (Beijing) kòutóu, from kòu to knock + tóu head
: an act of kowtowing

I think it more accurately reflects the respect the Democratic party has for the bushes.

[luckyleftyme2]

5. kowtow

left over from european rule,when the king liked your daughters looks he took her and you had to let her go.
when you bowed down because you had no back bone.
yup I think you hit the nail on the head=fear!

[Norrin Radd]

4. It's a small group holding the larger group hostage. n/t

[Maribelle]

6. Shame on those Democrats that did not put on their Jack Boots.

After all, when those Democrats were elected to congress they were not supposed to represent ALL their constituents, only the registered democrats; they were not supposed to think for themselves, only propagate the party line. Just like the republicans have done all these years.