What Greenwald learned about the Blue Dogs and Democracy today....

[madfloridian]

He hits the nail on the head brilliantly. He learned so much today about Democracy that I can only post a bit of it. I know the feeling...the rationalizations are overwhelming when conservative Democrats are criticized.

Things I learned today about democracy

If you believe in the Fourth Amendment, an end to the Iraq War, the rule of law for government and corporate criminals, a ban on torture, Congressional approval before the President can attack Iran, and the preservation of habeas corpus rights, then you're a fringe, dogmatic Far Leftist ideologue, the kind who ruined the Democratic Party in 1968 and wants to do so again.

Even though the country is overwhelmingly against the Iraq War and intensely dislikes George Bush, it's necessary for Congressional Democrats to support the Iraq War and accommodate George Bush’s demands so that they can remain popular and be re-elected.

If you oppose politicians who support laws that you think are destructive and wrong, then you're an intolerant purist who hates dissent and doesn't believe in democracy.

Kudos and :applause:

The old "purist" thingy rears its head again. Along with "fringe."

Remember, we are talking about a Congress with only 9% approval ratings.

More from Glenn.

Democrats in Congress have repeatedly capitulated to the Right and supported extremist and draconian legislation. The solution to this problem is to keep supporting the Democrats who are responsible for that. If you just keep doing the same thing over and over, eventually you'll get different results.

An election year is not the time to try to provoke debate about political issues.

The 2006 election wasn't the time to reform the Democratic Party because taking control of Congress was too important a goal to jeopardize with fixation on issues.

These are the things he learned today when he had the nerve to mention that Blue Dogs were not voting for our best interests.

Kudos and :applause:

[fascisthunter]

1. The Poseur Dem Talking Points are a Bit Anemic

I suppose they come from the same arrogance and ignorance Bush Republicans come from. Lie and keep lying until you think you win.

[Individualist]

2. The "purist" and "fringe" talking points are used by some people

here at DU. It isn't too difficult to figure out their agenda.

[madfloridian]

3. Correct. I just realized this had been posted, but I guess two won't hurt.

I glanced through GD but didn't see it.

Yes, I have been called a purist often here lately.

[Jim Sagle]

7. Or their employers.

;)

[LWolf]

14. It's the first ammunition some use.

I've been called "purist" and "fringe" more often on DU than I have been in my entire real life.

[fascisthunter]

39. Have a Cigar....

:thumbsup:

[Psyop Samurai]

4. Glenn nails it !... *bookmarking*

:applause:

...must read the entire article, folks.

[Luminous Animal]

5. I'm always happy to give a K&R

to madfloridian and Glenn Greenwald.

Greenwald is spot on with righteous anger. He didn't start off that way when I first began reading his blog many years ago but his writing and his insight have gotten a sharper edge.

[madfloridian]

6. He is true to what he believes.

He does not change with the weather.

He was right. Without competition, those in Congress get too comfy.

I have seen good Democrats kicked out of races here in Florida too often so more centrist, business friendly Democrats can run. Jan Schneider was one, and David Lutrin.

Jan has never said much openly about what happened to her, but David Lutrin has spoken out about how he was booted from the race for Tim Mahoney.

Dirty Dem dealings in FL 16th

Dave, a longtime Democrat was forced out of the race so a Republican millionaire could run for Foley's seat. There is a great article on this and other races like Cegelis in IL from Truth Out at the link.

David Lutrin, a school teacher, union activist and staunch supporter of immediate withdrawal from Iraq, decided to run against Foley before Mahoney entered the race. After Mahoney declared his candidacy, Lutrin was contacted by field organizers for the DCCC who asked him to drop out and let Mahoney run unopposed.

Lutrin said that he also met personally with Mahoney. During a three- hour breakfast meeting, Mahoney offered Lutrin a higher-paying job if he agreed to drop out of the primary. "Mahoney tried to get me to run in a different district. He offered me a job at one of his non-profit organizations where he said that I would make more than I was making as a teacher. He said I could campaign full time while working at his non-profit as long as I agreed to drop out of the race," Lutrin said. Lutrin declined the job offer.

According to Lutrin, when he refused to step aside, the DCCC shored up local political support for Mahoney. The local AFL-CIO chapter, of which Lutrin was a member, came out with an early endorsement of Mahoney's campaign. According to Lutrin, the union told him that "they would like to back a fellow union brother, but Mahoney has more money and more political support from the party." Lutrin eventually dropped out of the race when the local teachers' union decided to support Mahoney

The DCCC had the money, Mahoney had the money as a millionaire businessman...to "persuade" the unions to go along. That is terribly upsetting to me. The teachers' union and the AFL-CIO went along with Rahm and Karen and endorsed a Republican who turned Democrat to run.

And then the party could use the old argument that the district preferred conservative Democrats. Bull hockey.

AND look what is happening in TN...the DLC, the Ford family, and many in the black community are running someone against the incumbent..Steve Cohen, a progressive.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/2391

If it is okay for them to do it, it is okay for progressives to do it.

[bertman]

26. Paulk, if it's a load of crap, back it up. Tell us what's wrong with this analysis. I would really

like to know why Greenwald's and my opinions are so wrong, because based on my observations, Greenwald was dead on the money.

I don't consider myself a sychophant but I do appreciate Madfloridian's posts because they are usually in synch with my thinking, which is based on many years of life experience and my observations of politics as a citizen.

In the 39 years I've been a Democrat I have noticed a definite slide to the RIGHT in the party. The '94 election may have been a contributing factor but I put the blame on corporate money. As was pointed out, you are either a true believer of the DLC and DCCC's agenda or you are going to have a problem getting supported by the power brokers. This is why the Democratic party is now seen as trying to be "centrist" when, in reality, it's right wing. This is more than disturbing. It's truly outrageous. We do not need TWO REPUBLICAN PARTIES.

[Time for change]

8. In this age where corporate journalism monopolizes so much of our media

we really need to be appreciative of those like Glen Greenwald.

:applause:

[madfloridian]

11. We need more people willing to take the hits and still speak out.

I was reading Ed Kilgore's response to Greenwald's Blue Dog article called Time to Hold Conservative Democrats accountable.

Here is Ed Kilgore's response.

No, let sleeping "Blue Dogs" lie

These statistics sound awesome, don't they...according to Kilgore:

It's not as though there's a stable and easily identifiable band of rebellious right-leaning Democrats in Congress who are screwing up everything. According to Congressional Quarterly's (subscription-only) voting analysis, House Democrats achieved the highest level of party unity in history last year, with 92 percent sticking together on party-line votes (as compared with the low of 58 percent back in 1972). Senate Democrats' party-unity rating in 2007 was 87 percent, just below their all-time high of 89 percent (achieved in 1999 and 2001), and far above the levels common in the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s.

Yes, there IS an easily identifiable band who are screwing up everything.

And if you have Congress voting with unity...on measures that RIP APART OUR CONSTITUTION...then they are ALL wrong.

If you are in unity on the things that hurt this country too many times...when bills are brought up that could have waited until Bush was out of office..then that argument does not hold sway.

[cachukis]

9. Maybe I should vote repub. The ideology, the truth

I seek and vote for generally loses. Maybe I could bring the kiss of death to the McCain campaign.

[The Backlash Cometh]

10. kick

[Bandit]

12. The tremendous thumping Democrats took in '94 traumatized them for life I fear.

The ones there now I doubt will ever get over it. The only hope is to find good people to run against them. I realize that is an almost impossible task but unless we somehow do that Rush Limbaugh will have dealt us the death blow..

[defendandprotect]

18. We have no idea what '94 really was . . . it was a success for the propagandists --

that's for sure; Newt is a superior propagandist ---

but can I believe that America is really that dumb?

If so --- we might as all give up right now --- !!!

No -- I think we've had election steals going on since the 1963 coup on our government ---

[ieoeja]

30. Guns, guns, guns and guns.

While anecdotes aren't worth the paper I'm not writing this on, I personally know a LOT of people who regularly voted Democrat who turned Republican in 1994 over that one single issue. Once they turned over that issue, they started learning the GOP talking points.

One of the last discussions I had with a group of those friends concerned how much they thought I had changed. I was the only one to move to the big city, you see. So we went over each of the hot button issues: abortion, affirmative action, social security, minimum wage, taxes, etc. And on every issue except for firearms, they were forced to acknowledge that their position had changed 180 degrees. While mine had not changed on any, including on firearms.

Of course, they concluded that just meant they had matured. So there was no winning them over at the time.

Worse yet, they raised all their children to be GOP. So while many of these older folks can be won back if we can get them to focus on the issues that used to concern them, their kids are true GOPers now and will be really difficult to win over.

[defendandprotect]

50. Wow . . .

Since I've never known the GOP to speak any truth --- again, I suggest that propaganda

works very well ---

and so do their steals ----

We've seen a lot --- but I imagine they'll have something new ---

something bigger and better than fascist rallies and the Supreme Court --- ???

[desktop]

13. I would rather see a democratic congress with core values than a large membership

I would like to see the democratic congress and if necessary the senate asking some democratic congressmen who blatantly ignore the core interests of democrats to leave the party. This of course could mean less of a hold on party control in congress. But when you have some democrats that are voting more republican than some republicans, do democrats really want to be associated with Dino's, in the name of party control only. Dino's bring the party down. We all know of Lieberman, thank goodness he left the party, but now needs to be kicked off party committees. But there are lesser known congressmen, like democratic congressman Boren of Oklahoma, who votes with republicans 2/3's of the time, supports the Iraq war, and supports McCain for president. These guys need to be stripped of everything and asked to leave.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. I always find it amusing that the ones calling others "purists" demand party loyalty.

They seem oblivious to the irony.

[mmonk]

16. Hammer, meet nail.

[defendandprotect]

17. It's really frustrating -- point out a DINO and you get back DPINO . . .

in other words, they'll argue that it doesn't matter what the candidate's positions are

as long as they're wearing the Democratic Party LABEL . . . !!!

Evidently, they've never worked out in their minds where that's taking them ---

and, frankly they don't seem to want to know or give a damn --



And they are quite aggressive about NOT wanting to know and not wanting to understand

the repercussions of this --- in fact, they'll deny them!!!

[Phred42]

19. K & R - the Democratic Party WILL NOT survive

unless it purges itself of Blue Dogs and DLC.

And gets back to it's core principles - which do not include the Corporatist agendas of the Republican-lite Blue Dogs DLC.

Yep! Bill & Hillary talking about you too.

[colsohlibgal]

20. Awesome!

As another fringe leftist Marxist pinko ideologue I loved this piece by Greenwald, it is just great satirical sarcasm and dead on!

[paulk]

21. what a load of crap

of course, Mr. Greenwald has a couple of books he's trying to sell and it's important to stroke your target audience.


-------


Actually, the left likes to be insulted - it confirms their "outsider" status and provides that much needed daily dose of outrage....

[madfloridian]

22. I have had it with your daily loads of crap on everything I post.

You said: "what a load of crap"

I say

Good by now.

[paulk]

23. yes, and that's a typical response from you

This is a discussion board.

You post on this website expecting that your little circle of sycophants will pat you on the back. When confronted, it's time to, once again, break out the hankies. You're not interested in any type of real discussion. That's been obvious the entire time I've been posting here.

You take everything personally. I commented on Mr. Greenwald's article. Defend what you posted.

[ieoeja]

31. It might help if you would honestly attack what she posted.

She posts article talking about how electing Democrats does not matter if the Democrats are simply going to further the rightwing agenda. And that it is doubly silly doing so in a year when Gumbi could win with a (D) behind his name in many of the contested House elections.

Your entire counter argument consists of, "what a load of crap".

How does one reply to the debating point, "what a load of crap"? "No, a load of crap is brown and smelly. My post is in black and white and on the internet which has no discernable smell except for possibly the electrical ozone discharge of the servers and gateways."

[paulk]

32. actually, I subscribed motives to Mr. Greenwald's article

What purpose does bellyaching about the bluedogs accomplish other than making the author and his target audience feel good? And maybe sell a few books along the way? Does the author or MF have an alternative to "electing Democrats"? I'd sure like to hear it - provided it stays within the rules of this website, of course.

;-)

I've yet to see anything from Greenwald... or MF... that offers anything in the way of solutions.


-------

[madfloridian]

33. You called everyone who posts to my threads "sycophants". WOW

I hope they know how much you insulted them.

I was going to say good by, but sometimes it is important to keep your friends close....and well you know the rest.

Greenwald is very correct, and he takes the attacks that go with the territory.

[paulk]

35. and here I was hoping you'd put me on ignore...

but I see you're back trying to drum up some sympathy...

Hey - why don't you address the points I made about the article instead of making this about you again?

Think you could do that?

[madfloridian]

36. Well, now I know it is not just me you call names.

It is just about everyone who posts on anything I write.

You seem to enjoy trying to make people angry.

I am past that, as I can not make a difference if I let it matter what you think.

But it should bother the others.

[paulk]

37. and again

do you ever actually reply to what someone says?

[madfloridian]

38. Not when they make no sense and just call names.

That is what you do, so there is no logical answer.

If I called all those people sycophants, my post would be gone.

I don't name call.

[Oak2004]

47. Hint: that's a line of argument long identified as a logical fallacy

All authors want readers. Does that mean all statements written by all authors are false?

Address the content if you want to disagree intelligently.

[paulk]

48. LOL!

what - you look that up on Wiki?

Yeah, I'm pretty fuckin' stupid allright!

:eyes:

[readmoreoften]

27. Wow. Insta-ignore.

Please, good god, switch sides or join the goddamn unity party. I'd rather lose something than win nothing. Go move the Republican Party back to the center and leave the Democrats the fuck alone thanks.

[madfloridian]

28. Thanks...did you see this remark to me?

He in the next post referred to my

"little circle of sycophants"

Definition of sycophant, which he is calling those who post in this thread.

"n. A servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people."

Now I would find that insulting...a personal attack on anyone in this thread. :eyes:

[paulk]

34. And what party is that? The Greens? Isn't that what underlies

this article?

Or do you have some magic trick up your sleeve that will get liberal Democrats elected in conservative districts - districts that, up until recently, were held by republicans...


Would you like all those blue dogs to switch parties also? Is that your idea of "unity"? Is that what you mean by "losing something"?

[Joe Fields]

29. And how long have YOU had your head buried in the sand?

Some of us here know that kool-aid doesn't just come in one flavor.

I gladly K&R the Greenwald piece because it is laser-like in its accuracy.

[paulk]

49. 'bout as long as you've had yours buried in your ass, I suppose

hey mods - does that break the rules?

is there some arbitrary dividing line when it comes to insults?

sure be interesting to know where it is!

[fascisthunter]

40. I think Glenn Greenwald nailed "you"

and you are no liberal so you wouldn't really know what we liked... but you do know what we don't like, and that's what you take issue with.

Your comment on book sales is just an attempt to distract from the content of what he has written.

[paulk]

41. actually, by any definition outside of DU's echo chamber

I am a liberal. But, I'm not a "progressive" or a "leftist" if that helps to make you feel superior.

btw - is that the royal "we"?

--------------------

You know, your argument is really juvinile. You don't get to define me because you don't agree with what I'm saying in this thread.

Grow up.

[fascisthunter]

42. well then, you like being insulted... this liberal doesn't

and I don't know any liberal who does. As for the rest of what you said, lol.... live by example.


"Actually, the left likes to be insulted - it confirms their "outsider" status and provides that much needed daily dose of outrage...."


sure

[madfloridian]

43. Yes, paulk says the left likes being insulted.

""Actually, the left likes to be insulted - it confirms their "outsider" status and provides that much needed daily dose of outrage...."

It was his sig line earlier today. I kept it because it shows what he is trying to do.

If I called people sycophants here, my post would be gone.

That former sig line tells how he really feels about us.

[fascisthunter]

44. exactly

as if I haven't heard enough right wingers say it... now I come to DU and have to play along with people posing as fellow liberals just to repeat the same shit.

[madfloridian]

45. Where did that start? That the Left likes to be insulted.

I think I will do a search on terms.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[GeorgeGist]

24. Fortunately the path of ignorance ...

is a dead-end.

[madfloridian]

25. And in 2010 and 2012....fugetaboutit

His conclusions about why we can't get change in those years either.

"The 2010 election won't be the time to reform the Democratic Party because keeping and expanding the Democratic majority in Congress for Obama will be too important a goal to jeopardize with fixation on issues.

The 2012 election won't be the time to reform the Democratic Party because re-electing Obama will be too important a goal to jeopardize with fixation on issues.

Come back in 2014 with your Purist Fixation on "Issues" -- all this nattering about the Constitution and war and habeas corpus and torture and all of that irritating ideological purist garbage -- and maybe then they'll be some time to worry about all that (though that's doubtful, since there will be a Really Important Midterm Election in 2014 that will determine who will control Congress for Obama's last two years in office, and keeping Democratic control of Congress will almost certainly be too important a goal to jeopardize with some purist fixation on issues.)."

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/07/29/democracy/index.html