Obama says Boxer could lose if Dems don't work

[The Northerner]

LOS ANGELES — President Barack Obama delivered Democrat-friendly California a stark message on Monday: Liberal Sen. Barbara Boxer might lose her re-election race if her supporters don't work hard.

The president's stern words in a state where he remains popular and Boxer won her last re-election race in a rout underscored the perilous political environment confronting all Democrats in this midterm election year — and showed Obama is all too aware of the dangers.

"I don't want anyone here taking this for granted," he said at a reception at the California Science Center, the first of a trio of fundraisers on Monday night for Boxer and the Democratic National Committee.

"Unless she's got that support she might not win this thing, and I don't think that's an acceptable outcome. So I want everyone to work hard," the president said.

All incumbents face an uphill battle because of the economy, Obama said, though he insisted it's turning around.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5juui7didNwh_vzBmJyrbjxkeF-IgD9F6GF4G0

[donheld]

1. I'm pulling for her

IMHO she's got to win or we're screwed.

[GoCubsGo]

24. I think he's trying to avoid another incident like the one in MA

Part of the reason Scott Brown won was because Democrats there got complacent, and didn't go out and vote. It wasn't just Martha Coakley who took things for granted. Between those bizzaro sheep commercials, and the fact that she nearly destroyed Hewlett-Packard and laid off 20,000 Californians in the process, why would any rational person want to vote for Fiorina? And, didn't McCain fire her, too? President Obama is aware of that, and he doesn't want Democrats staying home because they assume Senator Boxer is a shoe-in and stay home.

[Johonny]

29. I agree

Personally California Conservatives scare me and have hurt my state enough to get my * out to vote.

[sabrina 1]

36. They didn't get complacent, they were told they were not

necessary to the party.

The blame for the loss of Ted Kennedy's seat can be placed exactly where it belongs, on the Rahm Emanuel DLC wing of the party.

These ideologues are destroying the party. How 'pragmatic' (a much over-used talking point word they don't seem to understand) is it to alienate the people who got you elected?

How stupid is it to think that by appealing to Republicans, you are doing the 'pragmatic' thing?

What they faile to understand is that they have no control over people's votes, and they can whine and cry about 'giving the election to Republicans'. When they do that though, I hope they are looking in the mirror, because Rahm Emanuel lost Ted Kennedy's seat and unless liberals and the base of the party themselves, help her, he certainly can't, he will be to blame for that also.

Why don't the DLCers stop whining and start taking responsibility for what they have done to the Democratic Party? Obama cannot be blind to his own actions during the HIR debate, and a few others, that may simply have disgusted people beyond where they can be depended on anymore.

[Sebastian Doyle]

62. There's a big difference there

Barbara Boxer is a good Democratic Senator who deserves to be re-elected.

Martha Coakley was a lukewarm DLC'er fan of Romneycare who wasn't worthy of Ted Kennedy's seat.

[truedelphi]

2. David Sirota had a whole column about a week ago in which he

States that Boxer will not be supportive of marijuana legalization because it will endanger her chances of winning.
Well, I certainly will wait to find out if that is the case from Boxer herself, but if she is not for ML then she can count on my vote going to the people that are. Even if it means voting for a Green Party someone I won't have heard of till the week before the election.
When Dems are too scared to be true to the demographics of the real world, then they cannot whine and cry that no one loves them.

[donheld]

3. And you can't whine when republicans take her seat.

[Tarheel_Dem]

4. You would risk electing Carly Fiorina because of pot? I don't see

how that solves your issue? BB may not be for pot legalization, but she's a true progressive, to the core. Good luck with your strategy.

I just hope that not all "progressives" are as self-centered as you.

[truedelphi]

5. Every single nation that has truly democratic strategies in place

For dealing with Health Care matters, for avoiding the damn endless wars, for seeing that their middle class has real decent paying jobs, and for more sensible marijuana policies has more than two parties.

Boxer is a very savvy person. I am waiting to see whether Sirota is right, as his article did not reflect the Boxer I have followed all these years.

But I think it is time to let any one of the people selling us out realize that I am not going to vote for them while they water down their positions. Regardless of who else might get in.

The lesser of two evils is still not a good.

[Tarheel_Dem]

13. I really don't care to discuss this with you b/c you just told me that

being able to smoke a joint legally, is the most important thing in the world to you. Enjoy Sen. Fiorina, and I hope she gets you legal dope.

I swear, it's folks like you who scare the hell out of reasonable people.

[truedelphi]

16. Actually it has been YEARS since I have smoked a joint

But the fact that much of the entire police network in this state has been corrupted by marijuana monies, that the politicians have been corrupted, that innocent people are fingered by those who are doing the trafficing, and those innocents rot in jail, while the traffickers name them and get out scot free, that is why I am opposed to the fact that marijuana is illegal.

When young women whose only sin was being pretty enough that some dope seller notices them and asks them out, and then that guy gets busted, and he is able to finger that young woman in retaliaition for her not having dated him, that is a sick scenario.

But hey, hate me as that is the easy thing to do.

[Tarheel_Dem]

18. My problem is your initial statement made it seem like you wouldn't

support a solid liberal Senator, who probably agrees with you on 99.5% of the issues, because you can't roll a joint in the mall. I'm sorry but that just sounded dumb to me. And isn't this a state issue? Would BB even be voting on this matter?

[bertman]

54. Tarheel_Dem, did truedelphi's explanation sound dumb to you? Apparently you did

not read and comprehend the explanation or you are just going to act like the explanation did not have many valid points that are worthy of every Democrat's (and every American's) consideration?

What does the state issue comment even have to do with it? Senator Boxer represents ALL the voters of California. If she cannot be trusted to support their best interest in the marijuana legalization debate, is she really the best person for the job? Whether or not she can vote on a state law is irrelevant. She has tremendous political clout and could be a key player on that legislation if she chose to do so.

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Political Heretic]

41. Until she addresses the CRISIS failure of our political-economic system, her good isn't good enough.

When she decides she wants to make the structural injustice destroying our country the pillar of our political career, good aint good enough. Because until politicians are willing to stop arranging deck chairs and address our sinking ship, we're still all on our way to drowning.

[cali]

43. that's literally insane.

[Political Heretic]

44. Hardly.

We're losing America right before our eyes, and quite literally none of our political leaders will even discuss the reality of our political-economic structural failures. Democrats are better than Republicans on a lot of issues, but tragically none of that matters if neither party will renounce the bribes of the financial elite and declare the truth - that our economic and political blended system is fundamentally broken.

Here's how its broken:

Of twenty of the richest nations in the entire world, we have the highest income inequality of anyone, and it is going getting worse. A country simply cannot justly function when that is the case.

We have the highest overall poverty, the highest child poverty and the third highest elderly poverty in the world. We have the worst infant mortality rates, and thats only comparing equal live birth categories across countries (identical measurements.)

The median income for a black woman in the united states: five fucking dollars

Amount of our nations wealth controlled by the time one fifth of Americans: 93% ninety three percent!

Real hourly wage earnings (2008 dollars) have not increased in FIFTY YEARS, while household income of the top 1% has exploded by TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTY TWO PERCENT in thirty years.

Exxon Mobile made 11 billion dollars of profit last year and paid ZERO US TAXES. General Motors took tax payer bailout money, reported billions of profit and paid ZERO US TAXES. In fact, 61% of ALL US-Based corporations pay ZERO taxes.

There are an average of THREE lobbyists for every ONE Congressperson in Washington. Corporate money bribes politicians. They are bribes - any other description is a euphemism.

Thirty years ago, productivity and wages decoupled - and productivity skyrocketed (and continues to) while wages, as said earlier, either flat-lined or declined for poor and working Americans. That means people are being worker harder, longer and with less benefits are voice (thanks to the obliteration of unions) than ever before and making no more and sometimes LESS money doing it.

When I hear Barbara Boxer make these facts and statistics the lead of her campaign or her political career, I'll vote for her.

But these realities I just quoted - its a national Crisis as sure as if we were under attack. It's a hole in our ship, and the ship is sinking. Carly Fiorina may be more crazy than Boxer and she may support some bad policy that Boxer would oppose - but at the end of the day, none of it matters if our country sinks because corporate owned politicians refuse to discuss the fundamental structural problems destroying our country.

And by failing to do so, Barbara Boxer is just as complicit in our countries demise as Carly Fiorina would be. Neither is acceptable, and you can damn well bet I'll be telling her office, and anyone and everyone who will listen exactly why I won't vote for either of them, until SOMEONE stops playing fucking games with the American people and starts telling the TRUTH and doing something about it!

[truedelphi]

12. Here's a thought - since my remark has you all riled up -

Let's have you and every other riled up person - instead of taking their assertiveness out on me, CALL Barbara Boxer's office this week,and explain to whomever answers,

"Californians are among the most liberal people in the nation on the issue of pot. There are tens of thousands of voters who will not vote for her if she doesn't support marijuana legalization. Please let Barbara know that she should not be swayed by the already corrupted police and customs officials (many of whom will be out a whole lot of pretty dollars, when pot is legalized) but instead she should be looking to vote for the interests of her real constituents."

I mean, for Pete's sake, I am only one person. But fourteen billion bucks of reefer was harvested this past autumn in the Golden State. Fellow DU-ers, My one vote really doesn't mean anything. But if someone out there doesn't make it clear to Boxer exactly what is at stake (ie her win over Carly may well depend on her being pro- pot legalization issue) then maybe a bunch of DU'ers calling her office can make her see the light.

[Cleita]

11. I'm sorry but that is really dumb.

It isn't that hard to get pot in CA legally or grow it legally. Instead if the Repubs take over, you can probably kiss even that legality good by. Pot will be legalized but not as long as Repubs rule. If Barbara, who is one of the true liberals in the Senate, gets defeated because a bunch of people, who should have been on her side, let a Republican get elected, especially that idiot Fiorini, then I am going to wonder about why you like pot kept illegal.btw This is a state matter and Barbara as US Senator has diddly squat to do with what is a law the Sacramento legislature would be working on.

[truedelphi]

19. Cleita, do you not think that many people are going to

sit this one out? Precisely because our "Democratic" leaders keep putting their fingers up in the wind and failing to understand that the polls they are being fed are not the truth, and that people will vote IF they see leaders doing the right thing and not selling us out?

I mean, denigrate me, if you want, but the opinion I am expressing here is one I hear every day of the week in the County where I live. Where many of the little street side shops offer up marijuana tee shirts, and other artifacts. That sentiment is: "If politicians don't wake up and legalize it BLANK BLANK BLANK" Everything from, "There will be a revolution," to "I am sitting the next election out."

And the fact is, how will we arrive at getting things that We the People deserve if we constantly are SCARED into voting for people who are no longer serving us?

Boxer is from Marin County, and Marin County, a County which despite having a huge sector of people over the age of sixty five, voted for Medical Marijuana with the final tally coming in at 82% for MM, and 18% against. So I think maybe Sirota had this wrong, and he was just getting creative for his column. But if Boxer is being duped into voting against We the People, then I really don't know if she deserves my support.

[BzaDem]

27. Why do you (and others) think that you somehow have a choice?

Seriously. Elections are always a choice of the lesser of two evils. What makes you think that you can change that? In other words, what makes you think that just because you really, really want something, you actually are going to get it? Most people learned when they were 5 that there is a difference between wanting something and getting something.

In that election, there will be no viable candidate that wants to legalize pot. Voting for a third party doesn't magically make a viable candidate that wants to legalize pot. It is simply a coping mechanism for people not mature enough to understand how elections work. It is approximately equivalent to a 5 year old hearing "no" and rolling on the floor screaming, as if screaming will somehow change anything. "We the people" have the right to vote for the viable candidate we want to vote for. "We the people" also have the right to contribute to the worst viable candidate winning by not voting (or voting for a non-viable candidate, which is equivalent). But "We the people" don't have the right to pretend that politics is anything other than a zero-sum game, just like "We the people" don't have the right to eradicate the force of gravity.

If you vote against Boxer and actually contribute to her losing, the Republican senator will probably vote against your wishes on every single issue, and after 6 years you will be angry enough to vote for the Democrat (regardless of their position on the issue). Reality hitting you smack in the head has a tendency to do that to people, even people who think they can temporarily put their fingers in their ears and ignore it. But why bother with the bravado now about "not being scared" when you are just going to vote for non-pure Democrats in the future anyway? 90% of Nader voters in 2000 got over themselves after 2000; why can't you? Why not just skip the 6-year act, pretend you didn't if you must, and vote for the viable candidate that supports your point of view more than the other one?

[Cleita]

32. Bravo! We'd just have a repeat of replacing Gray Davis with Arnold.

Californians just don't seem to learn.

[Cleita]

31. You haven't looked at her record. She has consistently voted for liberal

causes. She was one of the few Senators who wouldn't vote for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. She has been often alone in her dissent from the DLC Democrats unlike her co-Senator Dianne Feinstein who has been a good corporate Democrat. I hope you don't want a repeat of Grey Davis, a public servant all his life, who was relentlessly attacked by outside of California influences because of some mistakes he made in dealing with the energy crisis brought by Enron and the Republicans. It took Democrats thinking like this that brought down Grey Davis. The Republicans couldn't have done it alone and they brought us Arnold. Do you want a repeat of that?

Also, I work for a doctor who issues certificates for medical marijuana. I'm well acquainted with the MJ community here on the Central Coast, from the growers, the dispensaries and the doctors so I'm not pulling information out of my ass. I ordinarily like David Sirota but he is in error here and it could have devastating consequences in getting rid of one of the few Senators left in Washington who haven't been corrupted by corporate influences.

[truedelphi]

51. I am very well aware of her record.

January 2005, Right along side my piece on the "Stolen election" that my local newspaper ran was a huge box featuring Barbara's wonderful speech when she was the only Senator to join the Black Caucus in their procedural issues to deny the certification of the victory of George W Bush.

I would be feeling bad about not voting for her, but once someone crosses my lines in the sand then I cannot vote for them.

Sorry. (I would not ever tell someone else who I think they must vote for. Why it is that people will get mad at someone like me, who at least gets out and votes, rather than getting mad at the 52 to 62% of all Americans who don't even bother to make the trip to the polls, I can't say. It really stumps me...)

[BzaDem]

65. The key point you are missing is that voting for a non-viable candidate is the SAME as not voting

it is the same abdication of your responsibility as a citizen. If you vote for someone who you know can't win, you are not participating in any meaningful way. You are equivalent to someone who is too lazy to get off the couch and go to the polls. We have elections to decide who will win (among the people that can win), not to allow you to express your "lines in the sand" to the zero people that care.

[frylock]

30. the only people who "let a Republican get elected" are spineless dems too afraid to act like dems..

getting sick and fucking tired of taking the blame for milquetoast democrats and their losses.

[BzaDem]

66. Last I checked, even "spineless dems" don't vote for the Republican.

Last I checked, people who vote for a Republican (or do anything to aide and abet a Republican, such as voting third party) are those who let a Republican get elected. If Barbara Boxer voted for a Republican in her own election, then you would have my agreement. She would be helping to let a Republican get elected.

What you seem to be saying is that a "spineless dem" that votes for the Democrat is letting the Republican win, while people who vote for the Republican (or third parties) are not letting the Republican win.

:rofl:

Just because you are "sick" and "tired" of the truth doesn't make the truth somehow not true.

[t0dd]

56. +1 nt

[Irishonly]

59. CA GOP Idiots are Making it an Issue

They are bringing in the legalization issue and hoping people will do what you are planning. What Boxer thinks about legalization shouldn't be an issue as it is a state prop. They all ready pulled it on her and she stated she is not in favor of it. The iniative is going to be a b*tch to pass as it is. I will work for Boxer and vote for her no matter what her stance on legalization is right now. Minds can change. Electing a puke to the Senate is not a price I am willing to pay.

[krispos42]

6. Well, when Democrats don't do things to energize the base, this is what happens.

Mr. President, I'm sure you think you're a lefty. Hell, the way the Right screams about you, you probably half-think you're the reincarnation of Lenin. But you're basically in the middle, and so is what you're getting done. Left enough to make the Right squeal, but that's not particularly difficult.

You're not really rewarding the people that put you in, and you and the DNC are afraid to (or in cahoots to not) use the vast majorities we earned for you in Congress. So you're getting a big "meh". You're getting what you want done, you're getting what you promised to get done, but what that is is... less than inspiring. We really did figure that with supermajorities in both houses of Congress, your soaring popularity, the disintigration of the Republican party, and the near-depression shaking up the country and the world, you would see this as a chance to really get stuff done, stuff that needed to get done, to make historic changes that would shape 2 or 3 generations of Americans.

And, well, you're not.

[flamingdem]

9. Barbara doesn't deserve to win, the base has to get that nt

[flamingdem]

10. I mean deserve to lose! nt

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[krispos42]

33. I'm not sitting out the election

I'm discussing how this will play in the midterms. And it's not just me saying this; it's being said by mainstream liberals on the likes of Keith and Rachel, for example.

Clinton was a moderate that did far more kowtowing to the GOP than was necessary... and the right was still whipped up into a fury over nothing and proceeded to hound him for 8 years. His centrist ways did not appease the Right and didnt' appeal to the Left. If it wasn't for Ross Perot then daddy Bush would have had a 2nd term.

:shrug: 2012 is still a long way away. We'll see what happens. It's just that when the Right uses the party-unity card, the RNC and the elected politicians use it as an excuse to the go the far right, and when the Left uses the party unity card, the DNC and the elected politicians use it as an excuse to go to... the tepid center.

[Tarheel_Dem]

46. Here's an idea. Who, in your opinion, suits your "liberal" purity test?

Why don't you draft that individual, see how much money & support they can rouse, and we'll see how much of a contest they give the "Democrats". If Dems lose, they lose. If your guy wins, then so be it, I probably wouldn't vote for him, but I think you should go for it.

I think many mainstream "Democrats" are just sick of the whining from the farther left reaches of the party. I noticed you used the term "party unity card", which brought flashbacks from the primary season, when the purists became PUMA's.

I'm almost curious to see what would actually happen with a Romney White House, a Mitch McConnell Senate, a John Boehner House, a John Roberts USSC, and Sarah Palin at the helm of the RNC. It scares me just a little, but it might actually make some of the chronically dissatisfied more grateful for where we are right now. Those who think they'll be hurting the party by casting a protest vote, or sitting it out....let's just hope they're the first to feel the adverse effects.

You have my kudos if you drop the keyboard, and actually get out there and draft someone whom you think could actually win, and will agree with you 100% of the time, on every issue.

[laughingliberal]

48. Halter seems to be meeting the test and is gaining on Lincoln in AR

Seems it might even have pushed her to remember which party she belongs to. All of a sudden, she's on the side of some real financial reforms. Perhaps she's even pulled her ads where she bragged about opposing the Democratic agenda.

[Tarheel_Dem]

50. Has nothing to do with what I posted. (nt)

[laughingliberal]

60. Oh, I could have sworn you asked who would meet the 'purity' test

Which was pretty snarky, btw. I answered you that Halter is doing a pretty good job of running from the left and pushing one of the most obnoxious Blue Dogs to the left. We need to do this with all of them.

[krispos42]

55. That's not quite what I meant.

I was referring to the Congressional caucuses, Democratic and Republican. When the Republicans get their caucus to toe the line, they get far-right stuff done and legislation passed. When the Democrats get their causus to toe the line, they get centrist stuff done and legislation passed. I wasn't suggesting a party-purity litmus test. If I misled, you, I'm sorry... I didn't mean to.

Obama and the Democrats are getting what they want done, by and large, it's just that what they want isn't particularly earth-shattering.

Until we get substantial election reform (instant-runoff voting, campaign finance reform) we're probably going to seesaw between far-right and centrist governments. :-( Which means that a Romney-esque presidenty, a Boehner-esque House, and a McConnell-esque Senate is only a matter of time. And there won't be an FDR to undue the damage. :scared:

[truedelphi]

17. + 1.

[LWolf]

23. +1

[bullwinkle428]

34. +1. FANTASTIC POST.

[Political Heretic]

42. Well said.

[lonestarnot]

7. Damn it California! Don't let this happen!

[FrenchieCat]

14. I'm on the case!

We gonna get folks out to vote!

Yes we can!

[lonestarnot]

26. I feel better now!

:hug:

[flamingdem]

8. noooooo. Now I'm worried nt

[TreasonousBastard]

20. Right here in this thread we see the problem...

damn liberals, progressives, or whatever we call ourselves these days can't even agree that Boxer has to stay, much less how to keep her on the job.

I can't do much about Boxer, being 3,000 miles away and putting my limited time and resources into helping Tim Bishop and Gillibrand keep their jobs, but I can offer the unsolicited, and undoubtedly ignored, advice to stop the chickenshit internal bickering and just get out and keep Boxer in the Senate.

[Democat]

21. Vote for Carly Fiorina if Boxer won't legalize pot?

What the hell are some people thinking? Boxer is a progressive Senator. Who cares whether or not she supports 100% of your pet issues? No politician will ever support 100% of the same things that any of us do. She supports more progressive positions than any of the alternatives and she is a strong Democratic voice in the Senate. Let's be realistic and re-elect her!

[LWolf]

22. Way to put out that message of hope.

If I still lived in CA, she'd have my vote; she always did. I hope Californians will support her.

Incumbents face an uphill battle for several reasons, one being the economy.

[robdogbucky]

28. This one issue touches on so many factors

that speak to ills in our society that to say that one is a 'single-issue,' voter if turned off by one politician's stance on this issue is ludicrous, short-sighted or just plain stupid.

The legal prohibition that has been in place against hemp, cannabis, etc., has filled our prisons with non-violent offenders that waste our tax dollars in the incarceration costs. Next, the ongoing credibility (I can hear the laughter now) of our erstwhile government officials lies in tatters after the most recent century of this persecution based on untruths. Just because marijuana ended up being voted off the island and alcohol was allowed to remain by economic (alcohol, timber, paper, pharmaceutical, textile, etc.) and political (William Randolph Hearst, Harry Anslinger and J. Edgar Hoover) forces beyond mere marijuana smokers' control in the 1920s and 1930s does not mean we as a society cannot recognize the truth and finally rectify an injustice.

Marijuana holds potential to be such a positive in our world, if only the necessary research and experiments and tests were allowed to happen. Millions would benefit from legalization, only a handful would suffer. Only an outright idiot or someone paid to say otherwise would actually say otherwise. This simple mistatement of the facts does not bode well for the rest of Sen. Boxer's positions. I would have to question everything she says from now on, based solely on this demonstration of ignorance. Why can't some politician sack up, and like the conservative icon William F. Buckley did, and admit that our drug prohibitions do more harm to society than they help it. I guess Barney Frank has tried.

We abolished slavery through popular opinion overwhelming the political establishment, did we not? It took a civil war but we did it. We gave women the right through popular opinion overwhelming the political establishment to vote, did we not? Domestic opposition through popular opinion led to the cessation of the VietNam conflict, did it not? We will do this eventually.

I just hope the ignorance, whether wilful or just because her staff is lazy, shown by the Boxer office when they issued this statement full of teh stupid, was only an error, an oversight, a misstatement:


"...In a statement issued late Friday to liberal blog Talking Points Memo, Boxer's campaign manager Rose Kapolczynski said the senator opposes a California ballot measure that seeks to legalize and tax marijuana.

"Senator Boxer does not support this initiative because she shares the concerns of police chiefs, sheriffs and other law enforcement officials that this measure could lead to an increase in crime, vehicle accidents and higher costs for local law enforcement agencies," Kapolczynski said. "She supports current law in California, which allows for the use of medicinal marijuana with a doctor's prescription..."

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0405/boxer-legalizing-pot-i... /


First, there has to be some one group that has donated more to Cal political races than the corrections industry, but damn, I am hard pressed right now to think of one. They are a large donating voice in Cal politics, but they should not be the ones to influence and decide such a wide-ranging policy. There are BTW those in the Cal sheriffs and other law enforcement agencies that support TaxCannabis 2010. To opine that the repeal of marijuana prohibition would result in an increase in crime is just simply not existing on the same planet as the rest of us here in the Golden State. Traffice accidents increased? Since when? Based on what? Higher costs for local law enforcement? Who's zoomin' who?

This is the information age and anyone can access accurate information with their fingers in most cases. One has to have their head in the sand (or elsewhere) to cling to such outmoded beliefs. It was as if I stepped into a time machine into the days of Reefer Madness. Has she been asleep or in a cave for the last 70 years? If what has been reported as 80% of her constituents supporting medical marijuana is any indication, Sen. Boxer has some 'splainin' to do.

I don't want to have to hold my nose again and vote for the lesser of two evils, but I will if I have to. This is only one issue, and there is the bigger picture to consider. I would hope she sees the light by election time. Sen. Boxer, you need to read a bit and get out into the street a bit to see why your constituency feels differently about this issue than your staff has represented you do.



Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky

[frylock]

40. well stated

:applause:

[sabrina 1]

35. The so-called 'pragmatists' in the party

refused to understand the cost of alienating the base of the party. Obama is talking to the wrong people. He needs to speak to his DLC COS and others who didn't need the base when it came to policy, in fact they were so certain of that they told them to STFU and excluded them from any policy making regarding the HIR.

The blame for the loss of any liberal seat goes directly to the Rahm Emanuel crowd and their online supporters.

If Boxer loses that would be a huge loss and no one should forget those responsible, including Obama.

[dflprincess]

37. Exactly

"All incumbents face an uphill battle because of the economy, Obama said"

No, all incumbents face an uphill battle because the Democrats took their huge majorities and wasted them pandering to Republicans instead of working for the people who vote for them. Selling us out to the insurance companies was not really a very "pragmatic" move.

[sabrina 1]

38. Yes, and it is disingenuous of him to try to blame the economy

The base understands better than anyone else where the blame for the economy lies. Unlike the Republicans to whom this wing of the party caters, they would not fall for ignoring the devastating effects of Bush' policies on the economy. But, now they want the liberal vote. Obama could get it back by acknowledging the mistakes they made by alienating the base. However, once you lose trust, it's hard to get it back, especially when you are making promises during an election season.

[dflprincess]

39. I have sent Boxer a few dollars and I would vote for her if I could

But it really disgusts me that Obama, after making it clear time and again that he didn't need the left, is suddenly lecturing us.

Though, we shouldn't be surprised that he wants it both ways. If things go badly this November or in 2012 I'm sure he & Rahm will blame the left wing of the party and never, never admit that they screwed up.

[sabrina 1]

47. I agree with everything you say.

Boxer deserves support because of her record over the years and I hope she gets enough to hold her seat, but yes, it is pretty ridiculous to try to shift the blame to the people who elected them in the first place and who they betrayed on several issues so far. They need to remember NOT to treat the base of the Dem. Party as if they were Fox News viewers. We can think and are not fooled by propaganda or the myriad of excuses we were given for the swing to the right of this party.

I hope they aren't counting on the usual 'lesser of two evils' talking points. Nothing turns me off more than that. And you're right, they will try to blame the 'left' if they lose, which is why it should be made clear now who is to blame. THEY lost Ted Kennedy's seat! That's what you get when you put someone like Rahm Emanuel in charge of elections. If it had not been for Dean, they would not have the majorities they've had since 2006. People know that, despite the attempt by Rahm et al to falsely take credit for it.

[laughingliberal]

63. Agree 100% with all your points here

They just don't get it that Third Way political moves aren't going to inspire the base. Clinton got away with it but the economy was rocking when he was in office. Handing over the treasury to the Banksters and stating we have 'limited resources for this' when it came to the jobs' summit was not the most inspiring move.

[saracat]

53. Yep. Thats the truth.

[amborin]

57. exactly! Dems cynically dissed their base and pandered to rethugs and corps...now it's coming home

to roost

[laughingliberal]

49. +1 nt

[Grand Taurean]

45. K/R Too many around here will boycott the election

over a single issue. They did the same thing in Massachusetts and New Jersey.

[newspeak]

52. I think legalizing pot not only increases revenue

but the "war on drugs" has taken a toll on the innocent, as well as, the guilty. Two cases come to mind in California-the first was in Stockton-a young hispanic man was given permission to use a relatives address for his license-he was stopped and busted for MJ--the police went to the house (Stockton is a high crime area)-the elderly man in the house thought someone was breaking in and had come into the living room with his gun and was quickly dispatched. Searching the house there was no drugs.

The second incident involved a wealthy elderly couple, I believe they lived by the LA forest. Apparently, a helicopter scoped their house and identified the plants in the back as MJ-now, the man just had eye surgery-he heard his wife in the other room pleading not to hurt her, and he came in blindly with his gun and the cops blew him away. There was no drugs on his property. There are numerous stories of those who have been caught in the crosshairs of the so-called "war on drugs."

I have a book with similar stories--these are the casualties of the bogus "war on drugs." The money would be better spent on rehab clinics and other positive programs. Of course, as Michael Moore has said that corporations shutting doors in neighborhoods have done more damage to families and communities more than any pusher. And yet, we funnel money into a program than does not work, that kills people instead of helping them.

[TomCADem]

58. Oddly, DUers Were Saying The Same Thing, But When Obama Says It...

The past few weeks DUers were complaining about passivity and saying that Democratic apathy lead to losses in 1994. However, when Obama says the same thing, he gets attacked?

Amazing.

[laughingliberal]

61. I think some feel Democratic apathy is due to the Third Way politics which are failing to inspire

a lot of Democrats and may feel this has been ignored by the White House.

[Prism]

64. Tough

The gayTM is closed. No money, no volunteering.

The President should've thought about this when he was making right of center policy his number one priority.

[BzaDem]

67. The funny thing is, if Obama loses, you would be the first to donate money and time even to someone

more conservative.

It's amazing how complacent some people get.