Does anyone else remember the hell the Democrats had under the Bush administration?

[Peacetrain]

Our congresspeople were not allowed into meetings.

Hmmmmmmmmmm.

Think back to the Bush years.. and all the shenanigans the republicans pulled.

[Dawgs]

1. How are the results different than now?

Republicans still show that they control everything.

[Peacetrain]

3. We could not even get into meetings.. our people were setting up tables

outside of congress.. aka Wisconsin.

This is an ongoing battle.

They have the ability to stay on target.. they see a bigger goal.. no matter how destructive it is to our goverment.

We seem to fall apart when the battle gets hot.

[vi5]

5. I'm not saying "we" don't do that....

in that instance "we" being the people, the democratic voters, etc. I'm not going to claim that doesn't happen

But I'm sorry, the same thing can be said about most of our leaders and elected officials as well and they have more of the responsibility and thus bear more of the blame for a lot of our issues.

It's hard for millions of individual people scattered across the entire country to be expected to come together and unify and not cave under pressure, when less than 500 of them in Washington DC can't even do it.

[Peacetrain]

7. Maybe we can set them all on fire and spread their ashes to the four winds

of the Gods of conservatism,.. and they will sprinkle a few crumbs our way.

The need for this Jesus like character who can do it all is our damn downfall.

[vi5]

13. Where did I say that?

What I said was it's ridiculous to expect millions of people all over the country to be able to come together and put their differences aside and vote with a sense of unity when a fraction of that number of people, all together in one location can't even bring themselves to do that.

So we're not supposed to expect a group of people, of the same affilliation, who all take advantage of a particular identification (in this case Democrat) to get themselves elected, on a very specific platform to actually....you know...unite behind a set of ideals and policies even though they all work within 1 mile of each other, and most of them in the same damn building. But we ARE supposed to expect millions of people all around the country to do just that.

Part of "our job" is to convince people we know why they should vote Democratic. So when "they" can't even seem to be able to agree on what they do or do not stand for and what is or is not "on the table" then how exactly are we supposed to do that?

The reason the Republicans get things done and the reason they are sucessful at what they do (no matter how reprehensible it is), is that they are unified and they are united behind a specific set of ideas and ideals. Are there members of their caucuses who don't always support every single thing they as a party do? Yes. But the fact is that they still vote with their party and when they don't there are consequences.

Our party chooses not to do that, then fine. But there are consequences to that.

[Peacetrain]

16. Well just call this my part in reminding people.. my job

[WhiteTara]

2. What has changed? We are still in hell

because of the same kind of shit. Even if we have the senate and wh. We don't have the media.

[Peacetrain]

4. So what are you going to do about it?

[Dawgs]

19. Speaking for myself, why is it our responsibility.

Electing Democrats to majorities obviously isn't working.

[gateley]

21. Then let's just give up and stop trying. nt

[WhiteTara]

22. Evil flourishes when good humans do nothing.

It is always our responsibility. And obviously we didn't elect enough good democrats and it is time to work harder. Do you think that evil every sleeps?

[mazzarro]

6. And Democrats Can't March The Rethugs

The most annoying thing is that when democrats get the opportunity to change things or even things out, they waste it by wanting to show bipartisanship which is never reciprocated by the other side. In so doing, democrats come out as cowards and united because democrats never make it part of their operating procedure to enforce party discipline.

[Peacetrain]

8. What are you going to do about it?

[OHdem10]

9. Not defending the GOP, but for the past 30 years the GOP

has played Hardball. They are in it to win it, if
it legislation on the Hill or if it is an election.
For all this time they have used every trick in the
book and continue to do so.

Here in a nutshell is why they are able to carry things
off the way they do.

The Media uses Conflict as their primary guide in seeking
and presenting the news narrative. They specifically
measure how the game of Politics is played by either
side. The Media is not there to present substance
of either side. They see that as the Party or the
Congress's obligation. They are measuring how the
game is played. The Republicans accepted these rules
and perfected them. In order to do this they knew
they had to have a unified party with one message.
I have no explanation aS to why the Democrats have
never seemed to catch on. I can remember years and
years ago when Judy Woodruff at one time and Margaret
Carlson at another explained this on Television. They
explained all about how they are looking for Conflict,
and measuring political plays.

This was developed back in 80s I believe.

[Peacetrain]

10. Yep.. it did reach full development in the *80's* it really is a nixon plan

come to fruition.

It was so GOD awful during the Bush years seeing our people literally sitting out side of congress trying to get a crumb of attention.

So what do we do about it?

Keep throwing our people on the pyre or righteous indignation?

[vi5]

14. "throwing people out"

Yes. That's my solution. What is yours? Keep giving in and accomodating them and coddling them when they act in their self interest against the interest of our country and against the interest of the party?

How is that working out so far?

[Peacetrain]

15. So while you are throwing people out there.. what is slipping back in ?

I have a very strong sense of self preservation.. and I don't need to keep getting my teeth kicked in by the republicans to remember what got us here.

[vi5]

17. Then I'm not sure what exactly you're suggesting?

Are you suggesting we just do what the leading lights of the Democratic party are choosing to do?

Just shrug our shoulders and go "Oh well. That's the way it is. Too much work to do anything about it and we're afraid of what might happen if we try."?

Just run around screaming "The other guys are crazier!!!"?

Just go "Hey, I guess this is the direction that the country is going in since most of the people keep electing these types of politicians. Might as well just go with the flow and get in while the getting is good!!"

Do any of those sound like winning options? Do any of those sound like the stuff inspiration is made of in terms of getting people who vote (or don't vote) to change their minds or get off their asses?

Because honestly that seems to be what you're suggesting. Don't criticize the Democrats negotiating tactics. Don't criticize them letting the conservadems and blue dogs determine what our policies are and can be. Don't primary or attempt to kick out any conservadems or blue dogs. Don't not vote.

So what? What exactly?

[primavera]

18. How far are you willing to let that rationale take you?

Yes, I understand that compromise is an essential element in a democracy, but compromise, by definition, has to involve concessions on both sides, otherwise, it's no longer a compromise, but an unconditional surrender. Every time we agree to such a "compromise," the political spectrum shifts farther to the right, because the right isn't compromising. At what point do you have to stand up and say enough is enough, this is my line in the sand, I cannot make any further concessions? There has to be a limit somewhere, otherwise the day will eventually come when we're told that we'd really better stop whining about "ideological purity" and support a Benito Mussolini, because the alternative is that an Adolf Hitler will win and, man, then we'll really be screwed. And before you tell me I'm nuts to think that things could ever go that far in this country, take a look around you. This country has drifted so far to the right that now even Ronnie Raygun looks like a flaming commie pinko by comparison to the candidates running for election today. We're cooking to death by degrees, so it's not as obvious as being plunged into scalding water, but look at the US of 20 or 30 years ago, now look at it today, and tell me how effective a political strategy compromise has been for Dems.

[Autumn]

11. Yes I do. I find it surprising that the Democrats and Obama

don't seem to remember that. You can not give those bastards an inch.

[OHdem10]

12. Here is the Basic Reason: How often do we hear Democrats

say--we are above that. If we do that we are
just like them.

The Democrats are not willing to commit to a
stand or a position on anything and stick to it.

Conservadems are the Me TOO Group. Republicans
say, I want to cut taxes. Conservadems Me too.

The serious division in the Party makes it impossible
to speak with clarity on any one issue.

[Autumn]

20. There lies the truth.

The serious division is what is damaging our party. And we have a leader of the "Democratic" party who is a Conservadem. We have to decide which way we will go. As for me I am not a Conservadem and can not bring myself vote for one.

[Armstead]

23. Well, I remember it -- But what is frustrating is Dems act like victims in the Majority too

IMO, the balance of power -- and the behavior behind it -- has been consistent between the GOP and Democrats, no matter what the numerical designations have been over the years.

The earlier versions of battles on DU in those years was often the same as it is now. "Damn it why don't Democrats at least try to fight back?" and its counterpoint "We can't fight back because the GOP has all the power. And we can't alienate the public, so we have to compromise for whatever small things we can get."

But then the tables turned. Look at the GOP at the beginning of 09. They had lost the WH and both Houses of Congress. They had brought the nation to the brink of disaster. Their right-wing ideology was discredited, and the public perception was that they had become an irrelevant and nasty minority.

However, the same pattern continued as Obama and the Democrats bungled along and lost far too much in the name of "bi-partisan compromise." The GOP used whatever tools they had as a minority to scuttle Democratic initiatives, and reassert their power to drive the agenda. Which led to the 2.0 version of those old battles on the left. "Damn it why doesn't Obama and the Democrats fight back?" and its counterpoint "We can't fight back because the GOP still has the power. And we can't alienate the public, so we have to compromise for whatever small things we can get."


That's what frustrating to so many people. We made a great effort and won two years ago. But then the leadership on our side continued to give up, and left the liberal base in the wilderness, while excuses became the message.

[Peacetrain]

24. Never a victim..always a fighter

Armstead, I do not get all the negativity. I just don't. And it has been here specifically since before day one of the administration.

I am not happy with how everything is turning out. The thing is, I never expected to be happy with everything.

I was never looking for Jesus in the White house who could make it all better from a bully pulpit.

The whole political meme has shifted in the last 40 years.

I never saw anyone, anywhere give up in DC or locally. What I saw was people dealing with an entrenched enemy who cannot be "talked" out of their bunkers. We cannot give up.


The Democrats have been fighting and winning a lot of the battles. But this is a long term war.

I don't know kiddo.. maybe its just that I am an older hand to hand political combatant.. I am just always ready to get back into the fight.


The road definitely goes two ways and I am for sure, a lot of people are not getting me. ;)

[Armstead]

25. I guess it all boils down to definitions -- Including what "fighting" means

Personally, (despite my ranting and raving on DU) I am actually more like Obama, in terms of being a consensus guy. I think the goal is to bring the nation back into more of a true balance and constructive interplay of right and left.

But I wouldn't want me to be President. :)

However, aside from my own shortcomings, I don't think that approach is the best one in the current situation because -- in a nutshell -- we are so far out of balance (in favor of the GOP right wing corporate agenda) that we have to be combative just to get to a point where actual compromise even becomes possible.

Also, it depends on the nature of fighting. I think tactics and strategy are important. And I think the problem with Obama and many Democratic leaders is that they have been lacking in tactical and strategic ability.

Without going into too much detail, I think they started a major battle over healthcare reform too early and made it initially too sweeping. IMO they would have been smarter to clearly set out the larger goal of making insurance companies accountable and/or offering a public alternative that is affordable to everyone. But instead of making sausage in public (while the country was struggling economically) they should have started with focused and popular measures -- like pre-existing conditions and insurance price controls and a modest opeing up of Medicare to younger people. And they should have cast it in populist terms -- and used the GOP opposition to paint them as the enemy of the average person.

Instead the Democrats created a muddle that neither had a clear framework, and was actually counterproductive to the larger goal of public healthcare.

Those kind of continual screw ups are what gall me. Especially when contrasted with the GOP's ability to use lemons to make high-octane lemon-aid.

As I have said elsewhere, I WILL support Obama and the Dems. But I also believe Obama is capable of doing much better -- but he and the Dems need to both set out a clear and understandable populist agenda, and fight for it in a smarter and more strategic way.

[PatSeg]

26. Oh I remember it well

I remember Democratic representatives had to meet in a cramped basement room, with people spilling into the hallways.

I mostly remember Congressman Jim Sensebrenner's outrageous behavior towards his Democratic colleagues.

<On June 17, 2005, Sensenbrenner, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, abruptly ended a meeting where Republicans and Democrats were supposed to be debating the renewal of the USA PATRIOT Act and walked out in response to Democratic members raising issues regarding human rights violations at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay and the ongoing Iraq war. He ordered the court reporter to halt transcriptions of the proceedings, C-SPAN cameras covering the meeting be shut off, and that discussion on the issue be halted. Sensenbrenner defended his actions by claiming that the Democrats and witnesses had repeatedly violated House rules in discussing issues he believed to be unrelated to the subject of the meeting.<4> His abrupt walkout was contrary to House parliamentary procedure, which is to adjourn either on motion or without objection. Political journalist Matt Taibbi described the incident in a profile of the 109th Congress published around October 2006: "Last year, Sensenbrenner became apoplectic when Democrats who wanted to hold a hearing on the Patriot Act invoked a little-known rule that required him to let them have one. "Naturally, he scheduled it for something like 9 a.m. on a Friday when Congress wasn't in session, hoping that no one would show," recalls a Democratic staffer who attended the hearing. "But we got a pretty good turnout anyway." Sensenbrenner kept trying to gavel the hearing to a close, but Democrats again pointed to the rules, which said they had a certain amount of time to examine their witnesses. When they refused to stop the proceedings, the chairman did something unprecedented: He simply picked up his gavel and walked out. "He was like a kid at the playground," the staffer says. And just in case anyone missed the point, Sensenbrenner shut off the lights and cut the microphones on his way out of the room. Commenting on Sensenbrenner's actions on The Daily Show, comedian Jon Stewart said, "Oh my God, he literally took his gavel and went home; we are officially being governed by children.">

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Sensenbrenner#U.S._House_of_Representatives

He turned the lights off and cut their mics!

[Dawson Leery]

27. I remember it very clearly.

Pardon me for saying this: I also remember those who had their heads under Bush's desk, the pundits, the now members of the tea party, the fundies, etc..
Those who were cheerleaders for Bush and told us to shut up and get in line, are the the biggest barkers around (because they're side lost).

http://www.txdemocrats.org/MeetRickPerry/top10.html

[jefferson_dem]

28. Some have 1. short memories ... 2. a made-up version of reality based on phony equivalencies.

[harun]

29. I remember. But when the Dem's had the majority they never acted like it.

The Blue Dogs just complained and stalled until they were all swept out of power. Opportunity squandered.

[uponit7771]

31. republicans changed senate rules after Obama got elected.

[harun]

32. What rule was changed?

[moksha]

30. We should have returned the favor while we were in power.