Naming Names: 60 House DEMOCRATS Embrace Austerity, Sign-Off on Medicare Cuts, Defunding Government

[kpete]

Capitulation: 60 House DEMOCRATS Embrace Austerity, Sign-Off on Medicare Cuts, Defunding Government

....................

The Stupendously Stupid Sixty, who signed a letter, along with a band of Fanatically Foolish Forty Republicans, to the Catfood Commission II--also known as the "SuperCommittee"--have essentially said, "we're on board with cutting Medicare, funding for basic research, veterans benefits--as long as we also raise some taxes". I'll come to why this is a group of Stupendously Stupid Sixty people in a sec.

.....drumroll for the Stupendously Stupid Sixty:

Robert E. Andrews (N.J.)
John Barrow (Ga.)
Timothy Bishop (N.Y.)
Dan Boren (Okla.)
Leonard Boswell (Iowa)
Dennis Cardoza (Calif.)
John Carney (Del.)
Kathy Castor (Fla.)
Ben Chandler (Ky.)
Emanuel Cleaver II (Mo.)
Gerry Connolly (Va.)
Jim Cooper (Tenn.)
Jim Costa (Calif.)
Henry Cuellar (Texas)
Danny K. Davis (Ill.)
Peter DeFazio (Ore.)
Diana DeGette (Colo.)
Norm Dicks (Wash.)
Chaka Fattah (Pa.)
John Garamendi (Calif.)
Brian Higgins (N.Y.)
Jim Himes (Conn.)
Steny Hoyer (Md.)
Dale Kildee (Mich.)
Ron Kind (Wis.)
Rick Larsen (Wash.)
John Larson (Conn.)
Daniel Lipinski (Ill.)
David Loebsack (Iowa)
Carolyn Maloney (N.Y.)
Jim Matheson (Utah)
Mike McIntyre (N.C.)
Gregory Meeks (N.Y.)
James Moran (Va.)
William Owens (N.Y.)
Bill Pascrell (N.J.)
Ed Perlmutter (Colo.)
Gary Peters (Mich.)
Collin Peterson (Minn.)
Chellie Pingree (Maine)
Jared Polis (Colo.)
David Price (N.C.)
Mike Quigley (Ill.)
Nick Rahall (W.Va.)
Mike Ross (Ark.)
Steven Rothman (N.J.)
Dutch Ruppersberger (Md.)
Adam Schiff (Calif.)
Kurt Schrader (Ore.)
Allyson Schwartz (Pa.)
Terri Sewell (Ala.)
Heath Shuler (N.C.)
Adam Smith (Wash.)
Mike Thompson (Calif.)
Niki Tsongas (Mass.)
Peter Visclosky (Ind.)
Tim Walz (Minn.)
Mel Watt (N.C.)
Peter Welch (Vt.)
John Yarmuth (Ky.)

MORE: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/03/1032783/-Capitulation:-60-House-DEMOCRATS-Embrace-Austerity,-Sign-Off-on-Medicare-Cuts,-Defunding-Government?via=siderec

The letter they sent represents a rare cross-party effort for the rancorous House, and its organizers said they hoped it would help nudge the 12-member panel to reach a deal that would far exceed the committee’s $1.5 trillion mandate.

MORE: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/house-republicans-make-cross-party-pitch-to-embolden-debt-supercommittee/2011/11/02/gIQAhCBugM_story.html?hpid=z3

[me b zola]

1. There is one name on that list that truly shocks me

Peter DeFazio (Ore.)

:wtf:

[jtown1123]

7. I need to see the language of the letter. That can explain more, maybe.

I still am shocked he would associate with this group.

[Laluchacontinua]

32. Surprises me, too. I also would like to see the language of the letter.

[in_cog_ni_to]

51. I was just getting ready to post the same thing!

Defazio? :wtf:

Everyone else on that list doesn't surprise me in the least. They aren't Democrats, but DEFAZIO????? Gawd help us. :(

[Snotcicles]

54. Me too on that one. nt

[BlueCaliDem]

83. I was surprised to see John Garamendi of California! He's a progressive

for chrissakes!

I really need to read the letter, focusing just where they plan to cut Medicare. It could be they're willing to cut money to doctors, hospitals, unnecessary tests, and such, but not benefits to recipients.

Lots of California Reps on that list. Could it be it's because California is slowly phasing out Medi-Cal and replacing it with Molina Healthcare and ILove-something-can't-remember-the-name? According to the receptionist, these insurances pay out more and offer more in services.

I have a son who has Medi-Cal, and according to his doctor's receptionist, one month before his birthday (Feb) he'll receive a packet to choose whether he wants to go with Molina or that other one.

[avaistheone1]

122. I am surprised to see Garamendi's name on this list as well.

I'm very disappointed. What the hell is going on?

[BlueCaliDem]

124. I don't know, but I'm wary. eom

[GreenPartyVoter]

86. And Chellie Pingree!

[Beavker]

112. +1

Exactly! I almost wonder if it is an error or some sort of alterior motive is afoot from PD.

[WinkyDink]

119. Allyson Schwartz, for me.

[Scuba]

2. This is outrageous. These are not "real" Democrats. I thought...

...Ron Kind was a good man, but now I will work to see him replaced with someone who upholds the ideals of the Democratic Party.

[TheWraith]

3. Unrec for bullshit and fearmongering.

Starting with the absurd "catfood commission" line which is nothing more than a new version of "death panels," propaganda intended to scare people. And continuing through the fact that this is directly lying about the point of the letter. From the Post article:

"A group of 40 House Republicans for the first time Wednesday encouraged Congress’s deficit reduction committee to explore new revenue as part of a broad deal that would make a major dent in the nation’s debt"

[jtown1123]

9. New revenue is a canard. It's closing absurd billionaire tax loopholes that shouldn't exist

in the first place. If you read the rest of the article, the GOP is clear they do not support tax increases.

[TheWraith]

15. "Closing loopholes" IS new revenue.

More to the point it's actually better "new revenue" than raising taxes, because it disproportionally targets people who are currently exploiting tax laws to pay less than their share.

[jtown1123]

21. Nope. Sorry. Closing loopholes that never should have existed doesn't

provide significant meaningful revenue. If you're willing to trade away a few corporate jet tax loopholes for serious cuts to Social Security and Medicare then we're never going to agree.

[TheWraith]

24. Strawman argument. No one said anything about "trading" anything.

And tax loopholes account for tens of billions of dollars a year.

[jtown1123]

25. What do you think they are going to agree on? Tax loopholes closed w/o cuts?

Don't make me laugh. The Republicans need to get some cuts if they are going to agree to give up their precious billionaire tax loopholes. And it's not going to come from defense, you can be sure of that. There will certainly be "trading away" on the part of the Democrats...it's what they do best.

[russspeakeasy]

55. Thewraith ususaly posts some good comments, I think you missed on

this one..

[truedelphi]

106. Curious and curiouser - I find myself agreeing with you

There are some very righteous fantastic Congress people on that list, including Garamendi and also De Fazio.

I don't think the OP is stating the facts, but twisting them.

[jtown1123]

109. Why not read the original letter before you decide? It clearly states that entitlements are on the

table in exchange for revenue increases...I did not send my Member of Congress to trade away benefits for revenue increases. Did you?

[truedelphi]

117. Yes the letter states that is what the Catfood Commission is doing.

However the letter signers are trying to find out what is going on

As another DU'er suggests - Keep Reading the Article
This also appears in the article:

“To succeed, all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table,” the group wrote, adding that previous deficit reduction task forces have suggested a goal of reducing the debt by $4 trillion over the next decade.

[JoePhilly]

12. +1 ... No details, nothing specific = Catfood Commission #2

The manufactured outrage machine runs 24/7.

If there were real journalists, they'd be interviewing the Dems who signed this and asking them for specifics.

I don;t expect to see that happen.

[jtown1123]

16. I guess Democrats pursuing austerity is not outrage worthy to you? n/t

[TheWraith]

18. "Democrats pursuing austerity" is a flat out lie. Read the Post article.

The letter is about NEW REVENUE. It is literally the exact opposite of what it's being portrayed as.

[jtown1123]

22. We'll see what happens. Just because new revenue happens doesn't mean we can cheer

you can bet it will come at the expense of the middle class in the form of serious cuts in other programs. We'll see who those loopholes affect.

[KamaAina]

29. You're right. They're not pursuing austerity. They're merely acquiescing to it.

:eyes:

From the article:

LaTourette, a close ally of House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), said the new coalition was a sign that Republican leaders are now willing to unite with Democrats on a grand bargain that would address both revenue and entitlements, even if it meant leaving behind some of the GOP’s hardline voices.

"Entitlements", of course, is RW/M$M code for "Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security benefits that keep millions of Americans from starvation, catastrohic illness or death".

[okieinpain]

67. oh yes if there are cuts thousands will die in the streets. n/t.

[KamaAina]

77. Maybe not in the streets, but in nursing homes

Already one-quarter of nursing home residents are people under age 65 who have disabilities. Many more are barely hanging on with the level of supports they have now. Once cuts go through, they could be forced into homes -- and, as a friend of mine told me, "I'd die if I had to go back in a nursing home." :(

[saras]

120. Nursing homes kill. Depression kills.

[pmorlan1]

31. Keep Reading the Article

This also appears in the article:

“To succeed, all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table,” the group wrote, adding that previous deficit reduction task forces have suggested a goal of reducing the debt by $4 trillion over the next decade.

[truedelphi]

107. Ah that is the truth of the matter. The OP is skewing the

Story. Some very righteous Congress people are aboard, like Garamendi and De Fazio.

[JoePhilly]

37. Yes, I'm terrified.

I'm curious ... would defense cuts be part if AUSTERITY?

Do you have ANY details of what cuts are proposed???

Has the President endorsed any?

Has the Dem leadership?

I agree we all need to watch this closely, but the endless hyperventilating is a DISTRACTION.

[jtown1123]

38. I respect your opinion but I have been following this far too long.

Max Baucus, on the Supercommittee offered some pretty hefty entitlement cuts and I read on AP he also had chained CPI. There was reportedly 1 trillion in new revenue...I didn't see any defense cuts.

When language is vague, like it is in the letter, I take the opportunity to make it clear what I want to see from these deliberations. If I sit quietly and wait for the outcome, it's too damn late.

[jtown1123]

40. Also, look at the "experts" they invited

Alan Fucking Simpson? Erskine Bowles? Pete Domenici? With the exception of Alice Rivlin, none of these folks are budget experts and are partisan fiscal hawks who are hell bent on cutting entitlements. Rivlin just looks at numbers and doesn't consider the consequences of policy so I can be somewhat forgiving there.

[sad sally]

50. Sorry, no more cuts to defense budgets - "irreversible" damage (to hell with America's

economy - no way we can irreversible damage the military)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The nation’s military leaders warned a House panel on Wednesday that cuts in defense spending beyond those already planned would deeply wound the armed services and jeopardize U.S. global influence.

The chiefs of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force testified that bigger budget reductions would limit their ability to recover from 10 years of combat and undermine their efforts to retain experienced troops.
---
Gen. Odierno said that cuts of as much as $1 trillion would mean an “unacceptable” risk to U.S. national security.

“Cuts of this magnitude would be catastrophic to the military and, in the case of the Army, would significantly reduce our capability and capacity to assure our partners abroad, respond to crises and deter our potential adversaries, while threatening readiness and potentially the all-volunteer force,” Gen. Odierno said.

The Army chief said steeper budget cuts also would hit the National Guard, thereby reducing its ability to respond to domestic disasters.

The Navy’s chief, Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert, said defense cuts of as much as $1 trillion would cause “irreversible” damage to the military.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/nov/2/military-chiefs-warn-against-bigger-defense-cuts/?du

[RaleighNCDUer]

72. US global influence is in desperate need of some jeapordy.

Because what THEY mean by 'global influence' is military hegemony. Closing down 450 out of 900 foreign bases would somewhat impact our ability to kill anyone anywhere anytime, but it would vastly IMPROVE our standing in the global community, making it much less necessary to be able to kill anyone anywhere at anytime.

And what would best improve the Guard's ability to respond to domestic disasters is for them to be where the domestic disasters are, not halfway around the world.

[stevenleser]

99. I'm wondering along the same lines. Nothing came of the "Catfood Commission" hysteria the first time

I want to see the details of this before freaking out and calling a lot of good Democrats traitors or worse.

[jtown1123]

110. Wait and see is always a good approach...not. Why not speak up now?

Reversing draconian cuts is a lot harder than preventing them in the first place.

[stevenleser]

113. Waiting until you have facts before you act actually is a pretty good approach. nt

[Jakes Progress]

102. Cutting benefits to the elderly and ill, doesn't outrage you?

Did you know that this is a Democratic forum?

[stevenleser]

103. Are you sure that is in fact what is happening? I see no details yet. nt

[Jakes Progress]

115. Ah. The New Democrat.

Wait. Wait. Then wait until it is too late. Then bleat about not visiting the past.

That methodology will lead to a complete right wing win.

[Jakes Progress]

101. Still confused about left wing and right wing, I see.

You are lumping republican pr lines and Democratic pr lines together.

Are you saying that you support cutting Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security? Or just one? Or two?

[fascisthunter]

116. Rec for telling the truth

enjoy

[jtown1123]

4. What the fuck? Peter DeFazio? He is one of the biggest advocates out there. Disappointing. n/t

[JDPriestly]

45. Give him a call. Give the person who answers the phone an earful.

Don't use profanity. Just say what you think as intelligently as you can.

[dtexdem]

5. 60 Dems who should never be supported.

I suggest a donation campaign to fund primary challenges to all of them.

[BrendaBrick]

84. Yep.

I am starting to get emails from the Dem Party asking for donations and I unsubscribe with the notation that I am only supporting the CPC (though DeFazio is a disappointment) - it still leaves many others in place who did NOT sign off on this ploy - and maybe someone could give equal time to naming their names as well!

[Huey P. Long]

6. OccupyWASHINGTON DC, eom.

[Leopolds Ghost]

48. We are, but there aren't enough people in DC. It's really a shame.

Especially because the police and local gov't are sympathetic, unlike in Oakland.

[tcaudilllg]

59. People are scared.

Time was, DC got occupied by veterans. A pro-biz president sent in the army, and the rest is history.

[queenjane]

8. What's David Price (NC) doing on there??? n/t

[OneGrassRoot]

33. I know!!! He usually votes progressive. WTF??? n/t

[stevenleser]

97. A lot of good folks on there. Castor, Maloney, DeFazio. Again, I wonder if that means we dont

have all the information.

[mmonk]

57. Yep. He has always voted progressive. Sucks.

I have almost no one to vote for on the federal level.

[Mimosa]

10. Thanks for the info and updates, KPete

You're a mensch. :D

[dionysus]

11. there goes DeFazio's support to run for pres...

[Bettie]

13. My rep is on this list

Off to send a letter telling him what I think of this.

[jtown1123]

14. Here's the text of the letter:

Wednesday, November 2, 2011
The Honorable Jeb Hensarling
Co-Chair, Joint Select Committee
on Deficit Reduction
129 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515 The Honorable Patty Murray
Co-Chair, Joint Select Committee
on Deficit Reduction
448 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510



Dear Congressman Hensarling, Senator Murray, and Members of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction:

We write to you as a bipartisan group of representatives from across the political spectrum in the belief that the success of your committee is vital to our country’s future. We know that many in Washington and around the country do not believe we in the Congress and those within your committee can successfully meet this challenge. We believe that we can and we must.

To succeed, all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table. In addition, we know from other bipartisan frameworks that a target of some $4 trillion in deficit reduction is necessary to stabilize our debt as a share of the economy and assure America’s fiscal well-being.

Our country needs our honest, bipartisan judgment and our political courage. Your committee has been given a unique opportunity and authority to act. We are prepared to support you in this effort.


Link: http://shuler.house.gov/2011/11/100-members-to-super-committee-go-big-1.shtml

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

27. delete

[jtown1123]

34. Why should I delete this? n/t

[Robb]

36. "...And revenues." You forgot to highlight "...and revenues."

Oversight, I'm sure. Let's do it this way:

"To succeed, all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table."

I'm not at all convinced this letter has been accurately characterized upthread.

[jtown1123]

42. until I see what revenues they are talking about, I'm not going to highlight it

I haven't seen any evidence we are looking at significant revenue raising a la allowing Bush tax cuts to expire. Most bipartisan plans floating around cut tax loopholes while simultaneous lower the corporate rate, therefore, we have no real new revenue and the middle class gets screwed in benefit cuts. Also, Democrats have always pushed for revenue so it's not really noteworthy to highlight. What is noteworthy is the insistence we cut spending on entitlements. This is a deficit commission not an entitlement commission. We can reform entitlements but in the proper context. We don't need to make massive devastating changes to vital programs in the manner of weeks. That is irresponsible and dangerous.

[Robb]

43. You clearly know more about it than I do, so I'll defer to you. (nt)

[jtown1123]

80. I appreciate that! n/t

[JDPriestly]

46. OSW is nothing compared to what cuts to Social Security and Medicare

and Medicaid would set off.

You want to see people angry?

Seniors really didn't scream that much when Wall Street announced it had eaten their life savings and would no longer pay interest to them.

But seniors paid their Social Security and Medicare taxes --- payroll taxes --- year after year. That money came out of their paychecks before they got the money to feed their kids, pay the mortgage, cover the doctors' bills.

To reduce the benefits that seniors paid for from the moment they started their first jobs -- often at the ages of 14-17 (that's the way it was back then) will take jet bombers. Seniors will not accept this.

And Republicans are fools if they think they will.

[stillwaiting]

64. Which is why many Democrats will support this as well.

What are we supposed to do then?

Well, we'll see.

There's no way cuts to the Big 3 will happen without general bipartisan support and large minorities within both parties decrying the action so that the little people at home can continue thinking: "At least SOMEONE is looking out for me in D.C.". Of course, that's just the theater...

[KamaAina]

17. Many of these aren't (or didn't use to be) DINOs

Cleaver and Davis have both been strong advocates on disability issues.

And Fattah, Garamendi, Kildee, Pingree, Polis, Tsongas? Inexplicable.

Amazingly, Polis, Davis, Pingree, Cleaver, Maloney, Fattah, and Welch are members of the Congressional Progressive Cauus -- and DeFazio is a co-founder!! What, exactly, does "progressive" mean in this context?! :wtf:

[TheWraith]

19. It means that this OP is based on a flat-out lie. nt

[jtown1123]

23. Why are you defending Democrats pushing for $4 trillion in deficit reduction? You really think this

is a good thing?

[TheWraith]

39. I believe actual FACTS are a good thing.

The OP contains the exact opposite of facts.

[a2liberal]

66. Too bad you don't seem to actually care about the facts

the letter quoted in a post above is very clear: "all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table." That sounds pretty damn clear to me that these "Democrats" are agreeing that Social Security, Medicare, etc. are on the table. You can keep trying to spin it however you want, but you can't change the facts.

P.S. Since your replies in this thread are pretty formulaic ignoring the actual content of the post you're replying to, up front disclaimer that I'm not going to bother wasting energy replying unless you actually bring up a valid point.

[geardaddy]

20. I'm not surprised to see Collin Peterson on that list.

Fucking DINO.

[DonCoquixote]

26. Kastor

You were supposed to be the one actual democrat in Florida!

[stevenleser]

82. She is. Something is wrong with the analysis if she, Maloney and DeFazio all support this.

Anyone have the full analysis so I dont have to do it? :-)

I have spoken at length with Mrs. Castor and her husband on many occasions. They are good folks. I also have had the chance to talk with Ms. Maloney. Mr. DeFazio I know by reputation.

They would not be in favor of anything nefarious.

[Hoyt]

93. Maybe they know that we really do have a problem and need to look at everything.

As someone who will depend on SS and Medicare in a year or two, I don't want to see any cuts in those. But, unless this economy gets turned around and headed in the right longterm direction -- we're all screwed anyway.

[stevenleser]

98. I have to believe at this point that the outrage is a kneejerk reaction to something we dont yet

completely understand.

I want to see the details before I freak out.

[Hoyt]

105. No joke. I'm tired of freakin out every few days when some BS leaks out or is misinterpreted.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

28. Are they shareholders in cat food companies?

[pmorlan1]

30. Cuts to Medicare on the Table

“To succeed, all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table,” the group wrote, adding that previous deficit reduction task forces have suggested a goal of reducing the debt by $4 trillion over the next decade (the mandate is 1.5 trillion).

Sounds to me like cuts to Medicare are on the table.

[jtown1123]

35. Of course they are. Baucus' first plan included Medicare cuts and Chained CPI. n/t

[woo me with science]

41. This is a moral issue.

Any Democrat who backs cuts to SS, Medicare, or Medicaid benefits needs to go.

Period.

[JDPriestly]

44. Good news. Xavier Becerra, my representative is not on the list.

Of course, he is on the Super Committee, so maybe that is why.

I shall wait and see.

He has strongly supported Social Security and Medicare in the past.

He is a Stanford grad and the son of an immigrant.

Good guy in my opinion -- but there is so much panic in D.C. and so much fear of the very rich. Who knows what will happen?

[Iwillnevergiveup]

121. He's my rep, too

and I believe he's still a good guy. His wife is a doctor.

[Warren DeMontague]

47. "In other news, we take you now to Northern CA, where a million-dollar-per-hour DEA operation

is underway to drag dangerous cancer grannies off to prison for smoking pot!"



"Chip, what's the situation? Yes, I know, I've never seen so much equipment, either. So shiny and new. And those agents- there are so MANY of them! They all look very well-fed, and rested.. It's a carnival-like atmosphere, here, for the police... Wait- What's that? Someone with a walker was spotted trying to escape the premises, and was holding a pot brownie? CALL IN THE CHOPPERS!!!$$!!!!"

[Warren DeMontague]

49. "EVERYTHING* is on the table!"

* except defense.

and the drug war.

But other than that, really, everything.

[Poll_Blind]

52. I just got off the phone with DeFazio's office and they were as surprised as I was.

I made sure they got a link to the letter, explained how this is being used, and urged Pete to make some sort of comment on this on his site. Looking over the actual letter, it doesn't really say much that can't be read any way you want to read it. http://simpson.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Final_Super_Committee_Letter.pdf">Read it here in PDF form (also includes signatures).

Now, you can read into that letter what you want. For instance, think about reading that from a hardcore Conservative point of view, then think how a Liberal would view the same text. I still don't like it, but I'm waiting to hear back on what Congressman DeFazio's reasoning was if he did, in fact, sign this.

The article at KOS jumps to a shitload of conclusions and they've already been batted around by complaints and had to make updates acknowledging this.

PB

[Jim_Shorts]

53. The Dems are well on their way of selling us out - did anyone doubt?

The Oblivious Committee by Katrina vanden Heuvel:

Last week, the majority of Democratic representatives on the supercommittee offered up an even larger deal — suggesting $3 trillion in deficit reduction, with a ratio of 6-to-1 spending cuts to tax hikes, according to the most reasonable Congressional Budget Office (CBO) baseline, or nearly 2-to-1 cuts to tax hikes on the CBO’s current policy baseline. Whatever the measure, the offer was markedly worse on spending than either the Simpson-Bowles Deficit Commission’s recommendations or the ideas ladled out by the bipartisan Senate Gang of Six.

A large chunk of the spending cuts would come from Medicare and Medicaid (some $475 billion over 10 years) and the newest establishment fad — a chained Consumer Price Index that would cut a medium earner’s Social Security benefits by about 9.2 percent in real dollars by 2042.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/11/02-10

--------------------------------------------------------
Approval of Congress is at an all time low of 9%, you could occupy their homes, their cars, their country clubs, it does not matter, these F***ers will not listen.

[mmonk]

56. Damn. Nobody to vote for in the House in 2012 either.

[tcaudilllg]

58. What is our plan for sending these guys back to their law offices?

[Bluenorthwest]

60. The Kos post is far over the top

Ill be on the phone at 9, but the blogger employs characterizations placed in quotation marks when quotes are available. Always armed flag, the need to rewrite and then argue not with that which is said but with your own characterization of it. The blogger refuses to work with the actual text and instead script writes freely, adding hyperbole and opinion in the place of basic facts. The blogger puts things in quotation marks that the blogger wrote, states that they are syaing that which they did not say.
The bloggers interpretation seems hyped to me. Will have to find out. But it is clearly a reading and a framing of the letter that sounds way more dramatic than the letter the need to write in quotes when the words are not a quote nor a parody is what it is, and it is not honest writing.

[piratefish08]

61. fuck... "no True Scotsmen" applies as fully to our Dems as it does to Christianity......

[madokie]

62. I should have known that boy boren of Oklahoma would be one of them

He's already said he's not running for reelection. I think he was hoping for the GRDA job but they gave it to another of the politicians, one who openly is a puke. boy boren is a DINO so I guess to the powers to be he wasn't to be trusted. Ha Ha.

[Bluenorthwest]

63. Just so you all know, anyone who uses the term 'naming names'

is automatically suspect in my world. That phrase is one of shame, and clearly this twit does not know what it means at all.
Any tosser of that language will have to lose it and come back to me with facts. List makers and their friends should not be welcome in our Party, they belong with Roy Cohen and Nixon.

[tcaudilllg]

70. You are no true Democrat.

[Bluenorthwest]

74. Do you know the history of that phrase? Obviously not.

The red scare, the witch hunts. Blacklisting. The right taking names of those they wished to destroy. It is far right wing terminology, which no Democrat of any kind should invoke if they expect to be recognized as anything to the left of Joe McCarthy. Some blogger who thinks it is cute to make use of HUAC language is unlearned, and needs to read up. Naming names is what a coward does. The term 'name names' is poisoned, tainted, and should not be used to pump up emotions, ever. It came from Republicans and it belongs to them for all time. Sorry if that bothers you. Deal with it.

[tcaudilllg]

76. It's not what you use, but what you use it for.

[Bluenorthwest]

85. I do not agree. That phrase has a nasty history, which clearly

you do not know, nor does the hyperbole loving blogger quoted. People in my particular occupation were subjected to years of hell by those who 'named names' and those who played that game with them. So using that language is to me a sign of a person caring not for facts, leaning way to the right, favoring arch characterizations over facts, employing false quotes, claiming that their own wild reading of events is the only true view, and of course, making that list.
You yourself instantly claim I am no true Democrat. That is exactly the sort of bile I object to. Name calling, list making, all of this has a long, sad history in our nation and our Party. Which clearly you do not know, nor does the blogger from Kos.

[a2liberal]

65. Ok, who's surprised? Raise your hands...

*looks around* What, nobody? Huh, ok...

[Le Taz Hot]

68. Jim Costa.

I knew it. Tell me again why he's better than a Republican? :puke: :mad:

[nicky187]

69. Extremely bad decision.

Maybe they should ask UAW, Steelworkers, etc., how much they ever got back on "concessions" they gave to management.

[L0oniX]

71. Dem or repuke ...what's the dif ...they are all huge asscarrots ...only a few are for the people.

Death panel!

[opihimoimoi]

73. BIG DIFF...The GOPers are selfish assholes who vote their party over the Nation

Obama and Dems vote for the Masses and the improvished....

[tcaudilllg]

78. Hmm... choice between selfish asses and non-selfish people who make excuses for not stopping them

Can I have an alternative, please?

[opihimoimoi]

81. The GOPers have fucked this Nation big time and we wanna

consider them for MORE?

I don't think so...

Look at their candidates for a clue....all losers

[tcaudilllg]

88. Reread my post, please.

[opihimoimoi]

94. I jus was "sayin".... i noes what ya said...peace ;o)

[L0oniX]

96. 60 Dems in favor of cutting Medicare.

[L0oniX]

95. "Obama and Dems vote for the Masses and the improvished" Oh really? 60 Dems in favor of cutting

Medicare. O yea they really care a lot.

:eyes:

[blindpig]

100. And who put Social Security on the table?

And who had the bright idea of the 'Super-Comittee'?

Whose side is he on?

[obietiger]

75. No House Democrats from Ohio...

Thank you!

[unblock]

79. trying to solve our problem of weak demand by cutting demand.

brilliant.

:sarcasm:

[BrendaBrick]

87. Is it treason time yet?

seriously.

[SemperEadem]

89. thank god my representative is not on that list.

[blindpig]

90. Some 'party of the people'.....

What a bad fuckin' joke.

[tcaudilllg]

92. That's 1/3 of all Dems in the House.

There must be a way to do better than this.

[marmar]

91. Has Heath Shuler EVER voted the right (that would be left) way?

nt

[Jakes Progress]

104. K&R Except

that you capitalized Democrat in the headline. These pretenders may get to put a "d" by their names, but it should certainly be lower case.

[Myrina]

108. Kick ... as proof that the problem exists on both sides of the aisle.

n/t

[FLAprogressive]

111. Somehow I doubt that DeFazio, Pingree, and Welch actually support Medicare cuts. The rest are

completely believable.

[Dont call me Shirley]

114. Very disappointed to see REVEREND Emmanuel Cleaver's name on that list.

Isn't he the head of the progerssive caucus? SHAME SHAME SHAME on you Reverend!

[Odin2005]

118. Collin Fucking Peterson being useless again, I see.

And Walz, too? :grr:

[burrowowl]

123. Fucktards!

Get some real Dem in their place!

[Major Hogwash]

125. How do those Representatives define "Democrat"??

What the fuck is the difference between them and a Republican now??

[ooglymoogly]

126. Time to work hard to say goodbye to these turncoat

flesh eating viruses.