Robert Reich talks about the birth of the "People's Party." Is this a Dem reply to the Teabaggers?

[Cal33]

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/274-41/5200-the-birth-of-the-peoples-party

[HereSince1628]

1. Peeps has a party?

[dmkinsey]

2. Not a Dem "tea party"

that would be reactionary.
The People's Party is a pro-active effort growing from people's realization that our elected officials, even the ones WE elected are not standing up for us.
It's born from the need for everyone to belong to a Union. All progressive people need to unite. When there's a demonstration in Wisconsin there needs to be a hundred demonstrations around the country.
Voting isn't enough anymore. We need massive demonstrations that will be impossible to ignore.

[SoCalDem]

6. Amen.. Once "the trades" pretty much moved offshore, unions needed to change too

Hourly-wage people need a union..no matter their "job". It's more of a social strata thing now, than anything else.

If you have a job where your boss has certain powers over you:

A job where:

you need permission for a bathroom break

you are TOLD when you can take a lunch or a break

your vacation time is dictated by a boss & not your own choice

you have no control over your own schedule (I'm talking about things like when they make you work late into the evening one day amd then have you opening the next & they do it repeatedly)

you have no idea when or if you will get reviews/raises

your actual "job" continues to change, making you do MORE work, for the same pay.

Basically, most jobs:)

[socialist_n_TN]

3. It AIN'T Dems. They had a chance to lead and didn't..........

this is a PEOPLE'S movement not beholden to ANY political party.

[Cal33]

4. The start of a NEW party?

[regnaD kciN]

5. If so, it's incredibly stupid...

Forming a splinter progressive third-party, in the current electoral situation, would only mean a divided Left, and Republicans sweeping to power in lots more places.

[NCarolinawoman]

16. Nothing wrong with pushing the Democrats to the left and holding their feet to the fire.

The teabaggers put fear into the Republicans and pushed them even further to the right.

Our so called "moderate" Democrats would have been considered right wing not too long ago (I'm including Obama in that definition as well). FDR, LBJ (on domestic policies), Bobby and Ted Kennedy would be considered "fringe left" by today's definition.

Push them to the LEFT! If it takes threats of primaries, so be it.

[socialist_n_TN]

7. I didn't say that, although I suppose that it COULD come to

that at some point. Right now it's STRICTLY non paritsan and ALL about economic rights and justice. It's the "1% against the Rest of US" movement. And yes, I KNOW the Republicans are wholly owned subsideraries of the 1%. Unfortunately, the Dems are a partially owned subsidary too.

[truedelphi]

8. Same thinking is going on inside our household

And many other households. For instance, consider the 2010 election here in California.

Kamela Harris (D) from the DLC was running for State's Attorney General slot.

Not only did she have intensely bad press because as the DA for San Francisco, her crime lab was in shambles, but also she was so beholden to Big Industry and conservative members of the DLC. You can feel free to implicate Di Feinstein on this one, that her people saw to it that Harris denounced an initiative that would have legalized marijuana.

And they saw to it that the denouncement was printed inside the Voter Initiative Guide, to boot! ("Hey there Voters- WE ARE NOT ONLY STUPID POLITICALLY, WE WANT YOU TO KNOW WE ARE STUPID!")

Was that initiative perfect? No it wasn't. But Ms Harris' people spent the time to denounce the initiative, rather than say, "We will work hard to better this type of legislation and ensure its future passage."

Considering the huge number of people in prison in California for marijuana, for parole violations after serving time for marijuana etc, and the huge amount of money paid to the prison guards, (some of whom make over $ 100K a year if they have overtime) and the fact that our budget is 20 billion plus in the red, then it proved to many voters that Ms Kamela needed to be taught a lesson.

In a state where the Democratic candidates swept through big time in Nov 2008, she barely eked out a victory against her Repug challenger. Despite the fact that most people hated the Republican!

People spent weeks counting her votes against her challenger, largely because a full nine percent of the electorate voted against her and the Republican, opting for those on the third party rosters who were sane enough to offer the voter's some real change, in terms of stupid drug laws that no one in Calif wants any more, and no one police department strictly enforces any more.

Even the head of the DEA for Northern California told reporters that he didn't feel his department could do much when most people on a jury are not going to convict people who grow there own.

[Cal33]

14. Nice to know. It sounds good!

[old mark]

9. The national democratic party has abandoned the working people and the progressive left...

we need someone who WILL represent us, since it is obvious the Democratic Party is no longer interested in doing so.

It is time to move on.

mark

ADDED_Thank you, OP, for the link-I just registered over there.

[Cal33]

18. You're more than welcome.

[buddysmellgood]

10. In other words, Nader was right.

[RagAss]

17. Yes...There's a reason Michael Moore worked for him.

[xchrom]

11. Interesting. We will see. Nt

[glinda]

12. I like the sound of it. I think it should be worldwide though and include an environmental focus.

[ThomCat]

13. It may be People coming together in a populist movement, but

it Will Not be the Democratic Party's version of the Teabaggers unless our party decides to work with the movement. What are the chances of that?

The only reason the Republicans are working with the Teabaggers is because they have the same corporate backers. Otherwise, you know damned well that the Republicans wouldn't touch the Teabaggers with a 10 foot Cattle Prod.

It will be the exact same way with our part. The Democratic Party will refuse to have anything at all to do with any populist movement precisely because they are controlled and lead by actual people. Can't have that!

It's only if the movement is a front group for nice, safe, wealthy corporate interests that either political party will be willing to take the risk.

So that is going to leave all the people in Wisconsin blowing in the wind without any help or support. Hell, we have already seen that happening. Obama's advisers pulled back any party support because it would be a "distraction" from their optimistic message?

Wouldn't Obama be better off in the long run by getting into the fight, joining the people of Wisconsin, and being seen as a fighter who does whatever it takes, whatever he, whatever his administration can possibly do to help the people of this nation in these hard times? Isn't that exactly the kind of reputation he desperately needs to rebuild and reclaim?

How is it going to help him to have an optimistic message without any substance if he's simultaneously avoiding every major fight where he's needed, and where he promised to be?

[Cal33]

15. For a long time I was hoping that Obama's eagerness to appease the Repubs.

and have a bi-partisanship with them were done with a plan up his sleeve. (Who would
really want to have an Al Capone for a business partner?). It seems that I have been
playing with wishful thinking.