Are Democrats too "passive"?

[kentuck]

First of all, shouldn't they inform people that this "crisis" over the debt limit would not exist if it were not created by the Republican Party? It is their baby.

Also, should not they remind people that we had a balanced budget in 2001 and the Republicans blew it. The Republicans blew it.

But, Democrats should also accept responsibility for the loss of jobs in this country. American corporations created more jobs overseas last year than they created in America. The sucking sound started with NAFTA, signed by Democrat Bill Clinton, and since expanded to several trade treaties. Many of jobs being created around the world are created by American companies. These same companies are escaping taxes and are taking advantage of low tariffs when they bring their products back to this country. This continues to be the responsibility of both Parties.

Should not the Democrats remind the people that Social Security did not cause this debt, other than that the politicians in Washington suddenly realize that they are going to have to pay back all the Social Security funds they have borrowed over the last several decades? They don't want to pay it back. They are looking for a shortcut to escape that responsibility.

Don't you think Democrats need to be a little more vocal and a little more honest about issues? Their passivity is hurting our country and destroying our Party, in my opinion.

[mmonk]

1. No, they have adopted the right's political economics which

has forced the Republicans to the extreme right to keep up appearances that the Democrats are left.

[scarletwoman]

35. Bingo.

[pwb]

Yes

[XanaDUer]

2. Yes

Obama needs to use the bully pulpit to explain, in simple terms, what is going on. The majority of Americans will understand and support him.

[AlinPA]

6. Yes. It's all about a clear message and being firm now.

[Fuddnik]

7. The problem is, Obama is complicit in the shenanigans.

The Republicans decided to look a gift horse in the mouth, with the Catfood Commission. In their eternal opposition to anything Obama, they shot down the commission for the wrong reasons. Just to be obstinate.

Obama appointed an "unofficial" commission, and when they couldn't deliver the desired consensus, HE interjected SS into the debt ceiling debate. The Republicans, in their infinite "wisdom" keep refusing everything they've been fighting for for years, even as it's served up on a silver platter for them.

All three branches of government are now dysfunctional. Throw them all out and start over from scratch.

[xchrom]

9. +1

[SusanaMontana41]

32. Yes. We the People should have the government we want. n/t

[Maraya1969]

10. That is a great idea. Have you sent it to the White House?

[Enthusiast]

Why hasn't he done it.

During the health care debate why didn't the president use the bully pulpit to explain to the American people the value in a PUBLIC OPTION? And, since then, on almost every subsequent issue, he will seldom say a word that doesn't favor the corporatist position.

[Enthusiast]

39. Why hasn't he done it.

During the health care debate why didn't the president use the bully pulpit to explain to the American people the value in a PUBLIC OPTION? And, since then, on almost every subsequent issue, he will seldom say a word that doesn't favor the corporatist position.

[Fuddnik]

3. Sorry, accidentally unrecced. Meant to rec.

Too much vodka last night.

Why Democrats are not out there Every day talking about the surplus when Clinton left office, and Bush policies are beyond me.

Maybe because a lot of "Democrats" voted for the tax cuts and wars?

And why they're trying to steal SS is beyond me.

[Chan790]

4. Yes.

I think we need to take a wholesale more aggressive approach to our ideology and tactics too, not just our rhetoric. It's time we started playing politics like bloodsport rather than bid whist. Winning requires that we start being a little more vicious with these GOP assholes. They have their goon squads and we claim to be above such crap and question why they kick our asses even when we have a Democrat in the White House. It's because we commit to failure. In positions, tactics, rhetoric and actions. It's because we don't mobilize for an ideological war because we think being correct will see us through and win the day. It won't. It never has. Every political fight ever was won by {metaphors of aggression}, even Ghandi and MLK were aggressively non-violent.

11d chess is not winning. A fucking KO that leaves Boehner crying while Cantor is relegated to searching for John-boy's teeth is winning.

[fredamae]

5. Too Passive? Absolutely-

Yes, the Dems must take responsibility. Clinton did NAFTA, for whatever reasons--Bad for Us.
However how many times have we expanded or deviated from the original NAFTA and made a bad situation worse?

In many cases Dems "gave in", Simply put: I'm guessing because we are rather passive.
The Nutters have us figured out psychologically, anyway.

Yes, Dems need to be more assertive, communicate more with frank honesty (think Sen Sanders) and learn how to Mean NO when we say it.

[aquart]

8. Yes.

[nevergiveup]

11. Yes, it is our nature.

[BumRushDaShow]

12. What is called "passivity" is really "empathy"

which precludes the use of ruthless, selfish, darwinian tactics against a fellow human to promote "individualism" rather than "collectivism". And sadly this translates into a period of literal and figurative destruction of a society that will eventually cycle back to a more humane period....

[Overseas]

20. Empathizing with GOP sociopaths? The Democratic party used to empathize with the poor.

That is why millions crossed party lines to vote for President Obama in 2008. They expected Democrats to empathize with the plight of the growing numbers of our fellow citizens falling into poverty from being evicted from their homes and bankrupted by privatized health care.

[BumRushDaShow]

22. Wow. Way to trivialize my post

with a strawman that was designed to bash the President. :crazy:

[Overseas]

26. That wasn't my intent. I didn't understand your use of the word empathy.

Democrats used to empathize most with the poor.

Empathizing with GOP liars seems counterproductive.

[treestar]

13. Are Republicans EVER going to get the blame?

Democrats are reasonable and want to live and let live. Republicans want to intrude in people's lives and cause drama.

[PCIntern]

14. I've stated that for YEARS here, only to be

shouted down by the "We shouldn't be like them" folk.

I say: Screw 'em. The only thing they 'get' is a cannon blast of rhetoric, so give it to them, both barrels. Howzzat to counter their 'lock and load' horseshit?

[fredamae]

17. I agree! Fight "fire with fire".

If we don't, we'll get more of the same. I have been "properly chastised" for stating the obvious. No, it does not make us like them. How can defending ourselves be wrong when it is done for the betterment of society. We, in many different ways over the the past 4 or 5 decades have remained passive and when that proverbial "can is kicked down the road" we are Inside the can. We let it go, land, try to survive, adapt---without Trying to stop it, using whatever means at hand.
IMHO, our own "live and let live" approach has landed us in carbuncle soup. How many more bruising "sucker-punches" will it take before we stop being so damned politically correct and polite?

No, I do Not advocate violence, but I do advocate not moving the damned line in the fkg sand again!

[Chan790]

19. You know I support that...

I've been saying it for years. Let's fight!!

[fredamae]

27. My parents and Grandparents were Dems

"Old School Dems" and they would have Never put up with this shit! Of course back then, Most republicans would never pull the crap they do now, either.
The repubs Used to be a noble lot, I never agreed with them, but at least they were honorable for the most part.

[dissidentboomer]

15. Yes. WAY too passive at a time when almost ALL of the facts

support their policy ideas and views. It is about to drive away what remains of my sanity.

[Scuba]

16. Gee, it would almost make you think the Dems in Washington were complicit. n/t

[Overseas]

18. Yes. Democrats should be reminding people of the facts.

It has been very disorienting to see them going along with the Republicans' big lies.

They should have stormed out of the negotiations early-- as soon as the Republicans tried to put the big 3 on the table. Insisting that SS Insurance doesn't affect the deficit. The income cap can be raised later. And refusing to cut Medicaid because it helps the indigent and Medicare because it helps the elderly with much lower overhead costs than private insurance.

[Shandris]

21. Well...something to consider here...

First of all, shouldn't they inform people that this "crisis" over the debt limit would not exist if it were not created by the Republican Party?

Problem. Just saying something that is completely counter to what the other party is saying is something that has been going on for decades. Why should they take our word for it? CLEARLY, if even the 'left-wing media' is reporting it, then the Republicans CAN'T just be making it up, right?

Facts don't persuade many people at all -- they have to be willing to BE persuaded before they will ever work. Yes, I think we're too passive. But 'speaking truth to power', while a nice saying, is about as useful as shouting 'TURN!' at a speeding bullet.

[kentuck]

25. Most people know the truth when they hear it...

They know that Reagan voted to raise the debt limit over a dozen times. George W Bush voted to raise the limit 7 times. If the Repubs pass the Ryan Plan to cut Medicare, they will have to raise the debt limit. They decided to make a political issue of something they had supported many times before. Yes, they can be making it up. I believe the truth has more power than you give it credit for. But, it has to be spoken.

[Shandris]

31. You really think 'most people' know Reagan raised the debt limit 12 times?

'Most' people can't even identify who we went to war with during the Revolutionary War! My own GRANDMOTHER can't tell you who Adolf Hitler was, and she grew up during the War! No, I don't think most people know truth when they hear it at all. And a good percentage of those who do can't figure out what to DO with the truth. "Yeah, Reagan raised it 12 times. But that was then, the deficit is bigger now." Congratulations, by the time you've finished explaining everything they've tuned you out because you became a 'political shill'.

People don't want to leave their comfort zone. This is scientific fact. Emerging studies of things like 'fanboys' show that there is even chemical reactions in the brain that cause good feelings from defending their preferred 'brand'. Identity has been wrapped up in branding, and it's like dopamine to people. 'Truth' is scary, and it involves thinking, cognitive dissonance, rationalization, re-alignment of attitude and belief vis-a-vis the world and how they perceive it, and all manner of other time-consuming, less-savory forms of uncomfortableness. OR...they can turn on American Idol, ignore the 'debt limit' and how many times Reagan raised it, and relax after a long day at work. People have been conditioned to think its OKAY to be uninformed and stupid, or willfully ignorant. That being intelligent is being an 'elitist', and 'holier than thou'. This has been a devastatingly effective tactic against thought, and until we can combat that, any 'truth speaking' is doomed to failure imo in an aggregate sense (obviously, there are those who are inclined to listen, like those of us here at DU).

[kentuck]

34. Most people recognize the truth when it affects them personally..

"You will not be getting your check on the third" usually opens their eyes.

I think Reagan actually raised the debt about 17 or 18 times but more than a dozen.

Then there is the vincible ignorance crowd. They know that they don't know but they don't think it matters.

[moondust]

23. Teapublicans are too aggressive.

You shouldn't have to become a Brownshirt in order to beat the Brownshirts.

[TheKentuckian]

28. No one is discussing becoming brownshirts, we are talking about standing toe to toe

with them and busting them in the mouth every single time they jump bad and never, ever allowing their lies to go unchallenged.

Unapologetically standing up to bullies doesn't make you a bully, it means you are not willing to be bullied and will defend yourself rather than to become a cowardly dirt eater, hoping and praying that if only you will eat enough mud the bully will leave you in peace instead of the reality that eating dirt only encourages the cruel and psychotic to force more down your gullet or better yet condition your chump ass to eat it by your own volition as they sit back and laugh till their sides are about to split.

You are not here today because your forebearers going back to the primordial ooze rolled over for the stronger but because they fought and found ways to be multiply force, take advantage of numbers, and out evolved the competition.

Cowering will not save you or bring about a better future for those that come later.

[kentuck]

29. You said that very well, Kentuckian..

:-)

[moondust]

36. You don't have to consciously become a brownshirt.

You may choose to be a brownshirt, as do some Teapublicans, or you may simply choose an eye for an eye--to jump into the sty with the pigs whenever they snort at you. Some Democrats may choose to remain above the rancor rather than end up smelling like a pig. Voters *should be* smart enough to know and appreciate the difference.

I do agree, though, that Democrats should be loudly pointing out the stuff in the OP. I heard Sen Ben Cardin on Hardball or something a couple days ago doing exactly that: two big unfunded tax cuts, two wars, etc. (I almost never see him on the teevee.)

[TheKentuckian]

37. I deal it what is above what should be. Voters like the idea of "above the fray" but

don't vote for it enough to make any substantial impact other than depressing their own vote.

Bullies do not respond to cowering and passive acceptance other than to up the ante and go to the old well a bit more often. Especially bullies with the authority systems at their back.

Self defense isn't an eye for an eye justice system, it is a rational response to legitimate threats. It is sane.

[Warren Stupidity]

24. Half of our party sees the phony crisis as an opportunity

to move their corporatist agenda along and are dismayed that the freaking lunatic wing of the republican party won't play ball.

[EFerrari]

40. I don't think it's half the party, just the ConservaDems in power

and their hangers-on.

[Warren Stupidity]

43. well yes, it is simply the faction in control

they most likely are not even close to half, which makes one wonder why they are in control.

[whathehell]

30. Yes, and Hell Yes. n/t

[Odin2005]

33. We need to quit being "nice" and give these fuckers a kick in their nads.

[FrenchieCat]

42. What does that even mean? Perhaps rank & file Democrats are sooo nice,

they don't actually do anything to the opposition anymore,
exactly like the leaders of their party that they criticize
constantly!

[Union Thug]

38. Yes - But I think the issue is much more complicated...

... than simply assigning passivity to the party.

I think all of these factors combine to produce today's so-called Democratic party:

- Decades of propaganda that has changed the way in which Americans view society and painted for them a conservative frame regarding the function of the state
- A shift from a wage economy to a credit economy - which facilitated the destruction of labor unions, offshoring of jobs and a decline in wages and benefits. This was one of greenspan's accomplishments, and many dems bought into the swindle
- The right-wing selling of "the end of history" meme as fact - which removed an underlying structural element of the labor movement - that a better world is possible and that democratization of industry was key to this. Again, many dems bought into this swindle.
- Media consolidation - an echo chamber that constantly recycles and reaffirms its own propaganda
- Growing disparity between the wealthy and the rest of us. Wealthy politicians (Dem or Repub) are absolutely incapable of comprehending the plight of working people. They live in completely different realities and apply the filters of their gated community lives to the masses. Hence the willingness of many dems to accept increasingly conservative frames.
- Pursuant to the above, many dems simply are not dems - they are moderate republicans (cases in point, Clinton and Obama). As such, they aren't so much "passive" or spineless; they are doing what they believe is right. If it walks like a duck and so forth...

All that being said, change only comes when the status quo feels threatened by the masses. Change will only come when the average American takes to the street and puts the fear of revolt into the hearts of the wealthy (assuming they still have hearts).

[PurityOfEssence]

41. They are afraid to call out the reactionaries as greedy neo-feudalists bent on serfdom for us all

They call us socialists even as our President gives them virtually everything they want, yet we can't even breathe the specter of "class warfare" or economic bullying.

The Democrats should easily be able to show bar graphs for the explosion of the deficit under Reagan and the two Bushes, but somehow that would be too combative. The reckless economic insulation of the rich should be obvious to anyone, but we can't even mention it.

Meanwhile, we have a President who seriously looks the world in the eye with a big grin and is proud that 90% of the stimulus goes through private industry. That is obscene in its folly.

You know what the big joke is? People LOVE it when their politicians are strident and combative with opponents. Obama is losing support constantly out of feckless disillusionment and outright disgust. People like LEADERS.

This is sickening, but the reactionaries have made him blink so many times that I don't see how he could stand fast to anything that they wouldn't buffalo him on. They smell blood. They're right.