How about a little reality check here

[SargeUNN]

I read comments here and hear on progressive radio shows comments that tend to bother me. I think we need to get a little reality check and put things in prospective, so please hope this will help.

The Obama Admin. has been disappointing in some ways, been successful in others even though some might have not been as much as we wanted. We still have much work to do to undo the harm that has been done under Bush the younger, but also the damage done under Reagan, Bush the Elder, and the Gangrich revolution. Corporations have a strong hold on our government thanks to these people and to stop them isn't going to be done in 4 years, and probably not in 8 years. They control so much of the media and money in our nation which means they can get out their propaganda and confuse issues.

The Democrats are our best hope of turning the tide and yes some Democrats are almost as corporate as the Republicans but we still have many Democrats that aren't corporate pawns. We stand a better chance of taking the Democratic Party to the position we want, no chance of doing that with the Republican Party, and a third party is still so far from being able to get power enough they aren't a real choice. Corporations already have tainted 3rd parties and the Republicans are using them to make sure they gain power.

We also need to come to reality on the "FEAR FACTOR". The fear merchants have done well in not only scaring people but also to confuse our reaction to this emotion. I read and hear some so say they refuse to be afraid, and while I understand their statement, I feel they have become a victim of the fear merchants by stimulus generalization. Fear is an emotion that we can't control, but we can react to several ways. Fear helped me survive Hurricanes Camille and Katrina, it also killed many in those storms due to how we reacted to them. You have to realize fear is a basis emotion and you can react to in productively or react in such a way to do more harm, like those infamous Hurricane Parties in Camille. Those people said "We aren't afraid of Camille." They partied for the last time in their lives and perished, but I am sure they feared before they died and cursed their decision. I was scared during both storms but I realized the force I was going to face, and I accepted that after the storm it would be hard and rebuilding tough. I refused to listen to the statements that those storms weren't going to be as bad as we were being told or the other side that said it was impossible to survive.

We need to remember how bad the rule of the Republicans were, realize some progress has been made under the Democrats and Obama, but that the progress can be stopped and things made worse with the Republicans. That is not trying to scare anyone, it is getting the facts and acting on the facts.

[rrneck]

1. Stand together or fall one by one. nt

[RaleighNCDUer]

2. The party would not have to depend on scare tactics if the administration

actually was seen to be fighting for the things it promised in the campaign.

I'd be a lot happier with the POS HCR bill, if the administration had actually fought for single payer (favored by 52% of the public), fallen back to a public option, (favored by 76% of the population) and then fimally, after the battle, settled for this (favored by the Republicans).

Don't tell me how bad the other side is going to be - tell me what GOOD our side is going to accomplish.

I am fucking sick to death of people prodding my lizard brain for a knee-jerk response.

[SargeUNN]

4. Don't be confused on that either

I realize when stimulus generalization sets in that it is very hard to tell when someone is trying to scare you with irrational fears as opposed to rational fears. Our duty is to realize if it is rational or irrational. We must look at the real facts such as the Republican record, the progress we have had since has been modest but has been made. The Republicans have clearly stated they want to undo that progress. We would be idiots if we allow them back in power and that is not fear mongering it is just realizing hard cold reality. We must know the difference.

[emulatorloo]

9. Rational vs Irrational fears. That's a good way to put it

Thanks for sorting it out.

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. I really don't give a fuck if the fear IS rational - it is still undercutting

REAL rationality.

Maybe you've never been bullied as a kid. I was. I had real, rational fears of just going to school. But I went to school because there was something I wanted to GAIN.

Scaring people only gets compliance. Offering people better alternatives, offering hope, if you will, generates enthusiasm. Obama did NOT get elected on a platform of "I suck less than they do."

Appeals to fear, rational or not, are appeals to the basest human nature. We should be better than that.

[SargeUNN]

24. Then the fear merchants

can count you into their victory list. Just like the Hurricane Party People, they refused to accept rational fear and use it as productive tool and instead denied it and perished. I am so sad you are at that point.

[RaleighNCDUer]

25. YOU are one of those fear merchants.

Instead of offering hope and change (and following up with action), of offering a progressive alternative to the failed policies of the republicans and DLC, all you offer is "they's gonna git ya".

So HOW are you any different from them?

[SargeUNN]

28. You are one of the victims of

the right wing fear merchants. They have clouded your understanding that you can't realize reality and how fear is an emotion that is made up of rational fear that can be a great tool and useful, and irrational which is what you should avoid. You need to realize you have to build to a level and while not abandoning your ideals, but realize you can't get it all at once. That is not realistic or very intelligent. If you tell a friend you are going to get in your car go half a mile away from a solid wall and drive as fast as you can into it. The friend tells you that you will be seriously hurt or killed and you say, "I am not going to let your fear peddling bother me.", run your car into the wall the reality come about doesn't it?

If you look at the record and facts you can see the GOP in power is certainly a logical and real thing to fear. To be afraid of muslims isn't. You certainly act on rational fears and use it, irrational fears should be discounted. If you don't see the difference then you have a case of stimulus generalization and confused. That is the difference.

[RaleighNCDUer]

32. Wrong. I do NOT act on 'rational fears'. I do not act on fear at all.

And I particularly do not act on people telling me I must be afraid.

I act on principle. It's a bizarre concept for modern politics which appeals to the lizard brain, but I will trust my principles over your fears any day. That way, I will know that my actions are not because of, but despite, my fears.

It is to be hoped that the end result will put us in the same place, only i will be able to look at myself in the mirror.

[bahrbearian]

5. Exactly

[Individualist]

6. Hear, hear!

As I've said before, I had my fill of scare tactics during the chimperor's administration. I'm not buying it from republicans nor from DLC.

[damntexdem]

3. Your reality check is in the mail.

We need to be balanced about Obama. He is not the enemy -- we have enough truly horrible enemies in this country. He has done some good. But he has not done good enough; and on some things (such as failure to prosecute crimes against humanity by the Bushistas, defending and even expanding the Bushista overreach for government power regarding "homeland security, and so on), he has been horrible.

[Change Happens]

7. [phone]

[Edweird]

8. "we suck a little less than the other guys" isn't very compelling.

[emulatorloo]

10. "a little less"?

[Edweird]

12. RW policy isn't suddenly 'progressive' because someone with a "D" behind their name advocates it.

It's still RW policy. If the RW is the bogeyman, but many of their goals are being accomplished for them BY THE DEMS, what exactly is the difference? Among other things: the individual mandate, the union busting, the assault on public education and the attack on social security are all far RW wet dreams. So, yeah, things might be worse with them in charge, but most likely not by much policy-wise. The rich will still get all the money and the rest of us will get ripped off. Just like under our current Dem admin. It's sad.

[SargeUNN]

11. ok let me point again to my Katrina Experience

As I watched the storm move in the Gulf my hope was that it would miss my area. It moved closer and I held out that it would turn and miss me, but as it got closer to land I realized I was going to get hit by it. At that point I had to realize not getting hit was no longer an option and so it was time to evaluate what options were available. One option I considered was staying in the house I lived in, but as I tried to secure things I saw it was better to go to a shelter. The house did lose part of the roof and so had I stayed it would have been even harder especially since my radio was not very good. I went to the shelter (a church) which had food, radio, a generator and other stuff that made it easier, but it also had 2 sections that lost their roofs. I made the right decision but even with the right decision it was not as good as I had hoped. Reality is that you have to accept what you can get that is better, and build off that, but while not being satisfied, you have to gain what you can and work to move on from there.

[Edweird]

13. I'm glad you made it out ok, but I'm baffled as to how this is relevant.

[SargeUNN]

14. good that you ask

however I must say I am disappointed you can't see the point. I almost feel I might be insulting you by trying to show you, so I hope you will not take it as an insult.

Hoping Katrina would miss me was my ideal thought. It wasn't going to happen so I had to change my thinking and give up my ideal situation since it was no longer realistic. The next hope was that I could count on my residence withstanding the storm well enough to provide me with security and able to not have to leave my pets and home. I had to give up on that and to make my survival more possible I had to go to the shelter even though I didn't want to. The shelter did well enough but didn't come out of the storm as well as hoped, but well enough to meet the main goal of survival and also I did come out better than had I stayed in the house.

We have some progress under Obama and the only real options we have are Democrats or Republicans. We obviously are better off with the disappointments of the Democrats and the successes of them and Obama. We certainly will have to work on improving but at least we have more chances of moving forward with them than the Republicans. We can work to replace the bad Democrats but we will NOT change the Republicans and we will only lose ground with them. That is the Reality of it.

[Edweird]

17. OK, Here's the problem: Katrina was a hurricane and Obama is the president.

Katrina was formed by heat and moisture, Obama was elected because he made certain promises. Survival after a natural disaster is completely unrelated to reneging on campaign promises. Your attempt to sell the "shut up and like it" pitch is a failure. Additionally, have you looked into some PTSD counseling? Everything does not relate to Katrina.

[SargeUNN]

23. here is your problem with your statement

Katrina's worse effect was NOT the storm itself as bad as it was. The worse part was the aftermath because elected officials failed us, who happen to be Republicans at the time so yes it was more than a nature's storm. However, that isn't the point and what you seem to not understand.

It is about reality and understanding you have to look at your options that are available instead of hanging on to expectations of immediate results of your ideals. You are being too narrow, because you don't seem to be able to understand everything doesn't have to be the same to be relative. Your statements remind me of "if it weren't for all those trees I could see the forest." You are being way to simplistic and stubborn in your view.

[RaleighNCDUer]

18. Strawman. Your implication is that if we try to hold Democrats accountable

then we are by some mystical means electing Republicans.

THAT IS FALSE.

It harkens back to the debunked 'Naderite' myth, that the lefties put W in power. That was not true then, and is not true today. Eliminate the Nader votes, and Gore STILL won.

Again, the best way to hold the Democrats and gain the independents is to stand firm on core Democratic principles. Period. If that means holding RW Dems accountable, twisting their arms a bit to make them support the party platform, then that's what we need to do. This 'eliminate the left, move to the right, then negotiate from there' DOESN'T WORK. It gains nothing on the right, and alienates the left.

This is the party of grownups. Scaring us with 'support the blue dogs or the republican boogeyman is gonna git ya' is simply laughable.

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. Well, you COULD have voted for katrina to not hit, couldn't you?

Oh, no, you couldn't. So whatever that experience might have been, it is NOT relevant to electoral politics. The tea party is not a tsunami, no matter how much they might like to think themselves that.

[SargeUNN]

19. you are so wrong

don't be so simply minded. You are talking like someone who just wants to hold a point of view and even when it needs modifying refuses to do so. You must be more broad or you will be a victim of it.

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. Hey, I'm not the one comparing electoral politics with a natural disaster. nt

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[Greyhound]

29. And denying the reality that others experience is reasonable?

"Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining."

[SargeUNN]

30. If I understood you I would answer but

I don't understand what you are saying. Please expand so I will have enough understanding of your statement. Otherwise I have no idea what you are saying just trying to use a phrase you like and wanted to use regardless.

[Greyhound]

33. Your OP is both condescending and attempts to scare people into

supporting those that failed to deliver.

I replied here because you use a completely unrelated example to argue that we must vote Democratic or we're doomed (fear) and then dismiss the poster as unreasonable because he pointed it out.

The reality is that Gore Vidal was still absolutely correct. "There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party...and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt—until recently... and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties."

Your premise rests on the fallacy that you know it would be so much worse than it is now. You don't know any more than I do, though I suspect you might be right. The bottom line is still that the Democrats have failed to improve our lives while further bankrupting us to save the rich.

Retaining a Democratic majority is preferable to us, but the overwhelming majority of American don't give a shit what letter follows your name, they care about what you did to make their life better, and for most of us they haven't.

"Who's that?"

"I dunno, must be a King or something."

"How do you know?"

"He the only one around not covered in shit."

[lapislzi]

21. How dare you speak reasonably on these boards?

We now return you to your regularly scheduled running around with your heads on fire.

[laughingliberal]

22. I wonder why we never see 'reality checks' for the 'centrists.'

Okay, I'll start. You win elections when more people feel they're doing better with the current party in power. Most people do not understand complex economic discussions. They understand whether they are able to pay their bills, feed their families, and spend a little time and money enjoying the one life they've got.

Passing legislation which would have enabled people to see real results or see that real results will be forthcoming (ie: they are now doing better or they see others they know are and have some hope it will soon improve for them) would have put us in a great position for this election. Passing the inadequate stimulus bill that we have to endlessly defend as having kept things from getting even worse was dumbass. Passing policies that fail or produce lackluster results in the interest of a 'win' is not pragmatic, it's dumbass. People may know, in some vague way, that things would have been worse without it but that's not gonna fire too many people up. We should have fought for the package that would have had millions seeing some improvement in their lives by now. If we had fought for it and lost, we could have been calling out the Republicans AND Blue Dogs all this time making sure the American people knew who was voting against them.

The reason the left should have a place at the table is because the policies of the left produce real results. Once people see their finances are improving, the whole debate about 'liberal spending programs' falls away. Pragmatic is passing policies that actually help real people knowing they will vote for you if they see their lives are better. Caving to policies that do not provide enough help is not 'pragmatic.' It's stupid and leaves you fighting a campaign based on 'We're better than those other guys,' which doesn't work all that well.

[oldlib]

26. A Strong Democratic Party

is our only option and it has my 100% support. The GOOP is out to destroy us and their method of fear has been successful.

[RaleighNCDUer]

34. Agreed. Only i contend that voting in RW blue dogs and New Democrat

conservative corporatists is NOT how to build a strong Democratic party. In fact, it weakens the party so that people have difficulty telling the Dem from the Repub.

How many times have you seen ads on TV for generic candidate 'X' - he's a family man with a good, clean cut family, who believes in fiscal responsibility and he LOVES America! Why would anybody vote for that? Give us some stands, some ideals that he stands for.

A Democrat should unapologetically back civil rights for all citizens, no matter ethnicity, gender, religion. Human rights for all people, no matter nationality. Empowerment of the people, and rational controls on corporations and banks.

The more Dems who proclaim their liberal principles, the stronger party we will have.

[old mark]

31. Rec. nt