We Should Be Angry at the Republicans

[democrattotheend]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/12/22/1173155/-We-Should-Be-Angry-at-the-Republicans

We can debate ad nauseum whether the president made a serious offer or is playing 11-dimensional chess. We can debate whether chained CPI is a cut and whether the president should have offered it. We can debate whether the gradual but significant hardship that will come from chained CPI is worse than the immediate hardship that will come if people lose their unemployment benefits suddenly and failure to reach a deal on taxes pushes the economy back into recession. There are reasonable arguments to be made on both sides.

But it is insane that there seems to be more anger toward the president and Democrats in Congress than there is toward the Republicans who looted the treasury to put us in this position. I write today to argue that the best thing we can do for the American people is to train our anger on the Republicans who made this mess and work to expose them for the reckless extremists that they are.

On Thursday night, there was more outrage on this blog about the president's offer than there was about the fact that House Republicans shamelessly passed a bill that would prevent the defense cuts in the sequester by cutting food stamps, ending the child tax credit for non-U.S. citizens, slashing Medicaid funding, canceling the Home Affordable Modification Program, defund the subsidies for low-income families purchasing health insurance on the new exchanges, and even cutting Meals on Wheels.
...

Instead of threatening to sit out 2014 if we don't like the way this latest GOP-manufactured crisis gets solved, we should be out there screaming about the Republicans' willingness to plunge the country into recession and even default on the full faith and credit of the United States rather than raise taxes even on incomes over $1 million.

If you like what I wrote in that diary please Rec it here and on Kos if you have an account. I am hoping it can serve as a reminder to progressives who is really responsible for the mess we are in and how we can be most effective at fighting their extremist agenda.

[Glitterati]

1. Wrong

We should be angry at ANY politician that ALLOWS the republicans to do this shit.

Any and all.

The Republicans do not control our government.

[newfie11]

5. Agreed nt

[forestpath]

6. +1

[bluethruandthru]

24. Absolutely! Democrats need to start acting like they're in control.

Republicans NEVER compromise and I'm tired that Democrats always feel like we have to give in - when we don't.
A huge majority of Americans of both parties, do not want any cuts to social security. So, why, when the R's keep holding the government hostage in order to cut the social safety net, aren't D's shouting it from the rooftops? We need to quit going along with republicans claims that social security is causing the deficit and any steps to fix the deficit must include cutting social security.

[phleshdef]

33. No one is in full control. The Republicans own the house. Period.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

60. "The Republicans own the house"? Then Nancy I-also-support-cutting-SS Pelosi should go home.

Her own home.

[phleshdef]

34. The Republicans control the house. The house is as powerful as the other branches on fiscal matters

Civics.

[BlueCaliDem]

38. Wrong.

At the moment, they do, thanks to some emo-progs in 2010.

[Glitterati]

40. Sorry, in case you hadn't noticed

Democrats control the White House and the Senate.

Republicans DO NOT control our government.

[BlueCaliDem]

42. Two words: filibuster rule.

Republicans do control our government, and if anyone underestimates the power of the filibuster rule, they're idiots.

[Glitterati]

47. Thanks for calling me an idiot

As for the filibuster rule, I have 2 different words for you.

Convenient excuse.

[BlueCaliDem]

49. I never called YOU that.

But judging by your response . . . calling the very effective and every powerful filibuster rule a "convenient excuse", well . . .

[Glitterati]

58. That's EXACTLY what it is

And you did call me names. For my beliefs.

Now, let me finish.

Everytime Harry Reid needs an excuse, he uses the filibuster.

Shuts us all up.

Not another word, except maybe "Poor Harry."

BS. The filibuster is a convenient excuse for Harry Reid not to do his job.

[phleshdef]

62. Stop posting. Take a civics class. And maybe a math class. Then start posting again.

The results will be incredible.

[Glitterati]

67. Wow.

Just. Wow.

Nothing quite like a personal attack.

But, I don't need your suggested classes; just the ignore feature.

[patrice]

52. Wrong, we should be angry at ANYONE who allows Republicans to do this shit, including our own SELVES

[Skidmore]

56. Ummmm. You did notice that they hold

the majority in the House which writes such bills. Reality bites right now, especially when it involves a bunch of Teabaggers.

[graham4anything]

2. Recommended.

anyone threatening to vote for a repub in 2014 is just wanting to continue to whine

makes no logical sense

How did that Ralph Nader thing go for NH in 2000? Cost Al Gore the election losing those 4 electoral votes.

[democrattotheend]

8. Thank you!

If you have a Kos account please rec it there too...not to be a shameless self-promoter.

I don't think anyone has threatened to vote GOP, but I have seen comments on here along the lines of "I'm never voting again if they cut SS". Really self-defeating, if you ask me.

[Fumesucker]

11. Six percent of registered Democrats voted for Bush in NH in 2000

While Nader got one percent of the votes of registered Democrats.

And Nader got two percent of registered Republicans.

http://politizine.blogspot.com/2004/02/debunking-myth-ralph-nader-didnt-cost.html

In New Hampshire, CNN's exit polling showed Nader taking more votes from Republicans than Democrats by a two-to-one margin. Nader received 2 percent of the Republican vote and 1 percent of the Democrat vote. Nader also took 7 percent of the independent vote.
At the same time, 6 percent of registered Democrats voted for Bush! This is the real reason why Gore lost: He couldn't hold his own base! The Democrats never want to talk about this. They never want to talk about their negativity or the lousy campaign Gore ran. It's all, 'It's Nader's fault, it's Nader's ego,' ad nauseum. But back to the exit polling.
On the ideological front, 7 percent of Nader's vote identified themselves as "liberal," while 4 percent called themselves "moderate" and 2 percent "conservatives." Again, 7 to 6, pretty even and the votes could have gone either way.

[graham4anything]

13. all of a sudden you trust CNN and Wolf Blitzer? CNN who destroyed Dukakis? That CNN?

and yes, Gore ran a shitty campaign, Kerry ran an even shittier one
Gore ran away from Clinton and picked Leiberman
Kerry picked Edwards,and prior to that offered it to McCain his BFF

That is why President Obama is President and everyone else whines.
Unless you are seated you lost. No matter what.

But what your numbers above also do not show is-

HOW MANY PEOPLE IN 2000 DID NOT CARE because Ralph Nader said it don't matter, both parties are the same?

HOW MANY DID NOT VOTE AT ALL???

and if you are going to throw love at Ralph Nader THEN DO NOT WHINE ABOUT SCOTUS
because if you agree with Nader that both sides are the same, then it mattered little who was SCOTUS 12/12/2000 anyhow

A vote for Nader was a vote for the republicans. A vote to sit home in 2014 is a vote for the republicans.
Only a 3rd party person who will give their vote to democrats should be considered.
Any protest vote will give the other side another vote in their state otherwise.

and every vote counts in a non-presidential year

and if dems lose because voters sat on their hands, and then whine I will call of you out then.

but don't let Nader off the hook. And he was financed by the right to do what he did.

Nader's statements cannot be forgiven.
SCOTUS in 2000 and beyond proves it.

[Fumesucker]

19. You're the one letting Democratic voters off the hook for voting Bush

If all Democrats other than those that voted Nader had voted for Gore he would have been POTUS.

But they didn't, six percent of Democrats voted for Bush.

If you think that's wrong then show me a link that proves it.

[graham4anything]

20. you can't know if that is true, nor know how long those people were

Me I think Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton should have been the nominee in 2000 or earlier

I think Gore should have not run away from Clinton, that was looney tunes
but its a slide for Nader.

but the mass # of votes for Nader and his telling people both are the same meant people did foolish things.

There is no way exit polls tell the whole story anyhow, but the raw totals show it.
Because people can lie in exit polls, and it suited Bush to not have Nader be blamed, didn't it?

It suited Bush to have Nader in the race, and he was financed by the repubs covertly or not.

[Fumesucker]

21. If I have no way of knowing then neither do you

You will not accept anything that challenges your world view and clearly this does.

Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would both have lost in a landslide in 2000, both have far too much baggage to ever be elected POTUS.

Obama did it eight years later by not having much baggage at all compared to either Jackson or Sharpton.

[graham4anything]

26. Hillary will win in 2016, and Obama & Bill will be by her side.Voting elsewise is wrong.

btw speaking of baggage

all of Hillary's is out and we can already forshadow how they will attack her, but none of the voters needed will listen to the crap and she will easily win the nomination and general

no other candidate in 2016 can say that, except perhaps one, but that is for a different thread and we need a woman president not another male.

[Still Sensible]

3. K & R

[Doctor_J]

4. I am. I am also angry at the Dems who cave in to them

like the resident of the WH, for instance.

[forestpath]

10. So am I.

[patrice]

53. You assume you know precisely what the definition of "cave in" is in a complex & dynamic situation.

I'm NOT saying we must define it the same way, but that EVERYONE should at least entertain the notion that they very definitely COULD be wrong and, thus, setting up self-fulfilling prophecies that result in defeat ON YOUR OWN GOALS.

[wandy]

7. Thank you.

[forestpath]

9. I expect to get screwed by Republicans. I don't expect it from Democrats.

When Democrats betray the people who voted for them they are no better than Republicans.

[Doctor_J]

12. When the Limbeciles in my life were screaming, "Obama's cutting SS"

after one of their chain hate mails a couple years back, I told them, "First of all the Republican Congress would have to approve that too. Second, there is no way this president will cut SS".

[patrice]

59. Take a look at the Democratic party from Truman on; people are real good at screwing OURSELVES.

The people betray themselves; anyone who makes that about someone/ANYONE else is perpetuating oppression, because when it's about someone else, not my own confusion or ignorance or naivete or passivity, it's ALWAYS and forever about someone else, always about the "leader", always looking for that authority, rather than authentically working on what I myself need in order for me myself to be more powerful, without having to lean on others for my thoughts and actions.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

63. "Take a look at the Democratic party from Truman on"? Eisenhower didn't offer to cut SS.

Neither did JFK, LBJ, Carter, or Clinton.

Nixon didn't offer to cut SS. Nor did Ford. Even Reagan didn't offer to cut SS. The same can be said for Bush-41 and Bush-43.

Only one President since Truman has done that: Obama.

[patrice]

65. PO is not a king, he functions in a CONTEXT, those who disagree with us are part of that context.

They are NOT 0. Their position has acquired strength, no matter how much you/anyone tries to characterize the current moment as a zero-sum FALSE DICHOTOMY in your rather selective choice of a history that includes extremely much more than your characterization of it, ever since, at least, Henry Wallace's loss of a very close set of primaries, convention, and nomination to Harry Truman. You can pretend that all of that did not create the incredible inertia that resulted in the Derivative Crash of '08 and today's current configuration all you want; that's up to you and so will be your degree of consequent ir-relevance.

You all want a king and PO is saying this is about YOU not him, sorry that's too much for some people, but the more you make anything about someone else, including presidents, the more it IS about someone else. Slaves have no need to actually understand the definition of "EVERYTHING is on the table". You can assume that "everything" is ONE thing & that there is one and only one card that makes any difference at all and you know, out of ALL of the players and out of an enormous "deck of cards" in play that you have counted well enough to know exactly what and where, when, why, and how that single card is going to accomplish precisely what you have pre-determined, based upon a rather exclusive and selective bit of information, what you guess it will do.

You ever see a move called "21"? Has Kevin Spacey in it.

How about "Margin Call" also Spacey & Dustin Hoffman etc.?

[patrice]

66. Just because you can't hear certain wave-lengths of sound, that doesn't mean that they are not there

And, yes, it doesn't mean that they ARE there either, but you will likely NEVER know the difference if you first don't admit that you don't know the difference.

[NCTraveler]

14. I don't expect the republicans to work in my best interests. nt.

[democrattotheend]

15. And you can't expect the Democrats to, as long as they have to deal with these extremists

So rather than threatening to take the ball and go home if you don't like whatever deal emerges, the best thing you can do to protect your interests is double down on efforts to get rid of these nutcases in 2014.

I don't remember SS changes being on the table in the first 2 years of Obama's presidency, do you?

[lark]

41. Then you weren't paying attention

He put CPI on the table as well as increases in the Medicare age at the last debt ceiling fiasco.

Do you want Dems to be dittoheads like so many Repugs? That's just not our nature. We think, we analyze, we get mad when someone says they're on our side and won't touch SSI or Medicare, then just a month or so later RECOMMENDS the CPI. We don't expect anything from Repugs, so when they act like who they are and propose heinouse Plan B, it's a bit of a yawn. When Obama betrays us, we scream from the pain.

See the difference?

[NCTraveler]

68. I really can't make sense of this.

"And you can't expect the Democrats to, as long as they have to deal with these extremists"

There will always be opposition. So I should never expect for them to work in my best interests?

[Scootaloo]

16. Well, there's a historical meme at play here.

The meme was forged after Reconstruction, when the Federal agencies pulled out of the south, and the southern states started re-writing history to suit their apartheid sensibilities. The meme was that the black people elected to office during reconstruction were petty, mean, incompetent, tyrannical, and uniformly characterized by a low, evil sort of cunning. That the southern states had to be "saved" from this frightful negro rule in order for reason and competence to be restored.

This idea of the evil, stupid darkie has been thrown at more or less every African-American government figure in American history. It is the main driving force of the Tea Party and the "Birther" movement, obviously... but it also rears its head in more, uh, "progressive" circles. I hold that we're seeing it here., the idea that Obama is absolutely not to be trusted, that he "doesn't understand" social security, that he's indifferent, uncaring, maybe even hostile to the desires of Americans...

but of course, Bill Clinton surely had our best interests in mind and was just misled or overpowered into signing NAFTA and "welfare reform" into law and overseeing the repeal of Glass-Steagall... and all those white Republicans, well, sure they're dumb, but that's just the way it is, you know, no reason to point fingers at the poor dears.

[dionysus]

22. i see you've noticed the "he doesn't even understand what SS is" meme being tossed around here and

there.

[Scootaloo]

23. Kinda hard to miss it...

All the way down to invoking Saint Ronnie to give a "Now, see here boy..." lecture.

[Cha]

17. I am.

Thanks for double posting, democrattotheend.

[union_maid]

18. Recommended

I like what you wrote very much. Don't have a Kos account, but am happy to rec it here.

[lumberjack_jeff]

25. Republicans don't care that I hate their guts.

They are evil, and they will continue to do as much evil as my democratic lawmakers will allow.

[democrattotheend]

28. The point is, most Americans don't realize how extreme they are

And yet instead of helping to expose it so we can get rid of some of them in 2014, some people on here are threatening never to vote Democratic again if the Republicans get their way on a very small portion of the agenda they are pushing for.

[TheKentuckian]

48. They don't? Why not, and what on Earth will change that over the next two years

that the past for decades didn't expose?

They have done nothing that is openly affirmed.

If "most Americans" don't know then they do not care to and are willfully ignorant, are supportive of such positions, or don't give a fuck what anyone's positions are, including there own.

I also don't know what supports the premise, it is like an assumed truth in certain circles and then taken for granted that these games will make some headway.
There is also a problem with the tactic, it generates more doubt among our base than it does in their's and feeds more feeling both parties are on the same track.

No, you can't depend on our party to not cut Social Security. They've already done it in most people's living memory when they raised the retirement age already (which creates more doubt because everyone seems to forget that in these discussions), there is no trust and deservedly so when the exact same rationale is trotted out again for another screwjob before the last one has barely even kicked in.

No, your premise is not convincing or supported.

[Autumn]

27. I am angry at them. I certainly don't need an OP telling me to be

angry with those scum sucking pigs. I despise their sorry ignorant asses.
That comes natural to me.

[democrattotheend]

31. I know the title seems to state the obvious

But it felt like it needed to be said.

If you can think of a better title I am all ears.

[heaven05]

29. too

many quislings/ brutus types to appreciate your truth. But I say thank for being level headed around all this hair on fire hysteria.

[SomethingFishy]

30. No I'm angry at Democrats..

With Republicans I'm... livid, furious, disgusted, spiteful...

With Dems I'm just angry.

Maybe it's my age bracket. Maybe I remember how an actual Democrat acts. Maybe it's just that I remember what it was like having a left and a right party instead of a center-right party and an off the rails loonyasfuck party.

[BobbyBoring]

32. I'm angry with about all of them on both sides of the aisle

If any of us did our jobs as poorly as 90% of Congress does, we would be fired in a heart beat. However, I guess we must consider what their job actually is. It's to strip the middle class of any and all wealth they may still posses and starve the poor to death.

In 2014, most incumbents should be voted out.

[samsingh]

35. i have NO respect for repugs and will hate them forever.

[cese]

36. cese

You hit it right on....there is way too much diversion on what really matters and where the true blame should be.....

[loyalkydem]

37. I'm also getting sick of seeing the pro Obama bashing threads I keep seeing all over the place

I swear some people not going to be happy unless they bash President Obama all the time.

[BlueCaliDem]

43. I've noticed that very disturbing trend as well.

There are plenty emo-progs here who claim they've voted for the man they now happily excoriate more than any Republican, and blame everything the Republicans do on him and the Democrats.

With Democratic voters like them, who needs TeaBaggers?

[Eddie Haskell]

39. I've expressed considerable frustration with Obama ...

That doesn't mean I'm not furious with the Republicans; just that I didn't vote them into office. They're beyond redemption.

[BlueCaliDem]

44. So you'll give the Republicans a pass because you didn't vote for them? Is that it?

But you'll bash President Obama and the Democrats and blame them for all the country's ails? Wow. Just . . . wow.

[Eddie Haskell]

46. And I thought we were friends.

Wow, just wow!

[BlueCaliDem]

50. Why do you believe we aren't?

Our waning friendship aside . . . so you'll give the Republicans a pass for all the ails of this country and blame Democrats and the Democratic President because you voted for them? What kind of reasoning is that?

[TheKentuckian]

69. No one gives the TeaPubliKlans a pass. They get full throated opposition to their policies even when

adopted by Democrats. They get not one thin dime nor a vote.

In actionable deed, they are the only ones being held accountable within the law, so what is that you want to indicate blame?

Democrats get shit and earn righteous anger by doing evil TeaPubliKlan shit, hence Democrats willfully purchase and take on blame that would solely be owned lock, stock, and barrel by the fascist party.

The sense is very straight forward, betrayal. What are you one of the silly and raw emotion driven people who has a cheating spouse and reserve your blame and anger for the stranger and ignore what the one who made vows with you did? Maybe you can wrap your imagination and mind around that as an anchor to understanding what people are feeling since the obvious is evasive.

I don't get what it is you don't grasp about Democrats deserving heat for emulating TeaPubliKlans and accepting their delusional worldview.

Then there are literal questions of sanity here. What is the point in blaming a scorpion for biting you, was any other outcome in the cards? Is the scorpion not acting within its nature? Meanwhile, your own dog has a much higher level of expectation about biting you.
Are you arguing that we should be cheering the dog bites? What the fuck are you trying to say?

[One of the 99]

45. Very well said nt

[patrice]

51. All of us need to get a little better acquainted with the possibilities within our reach in things

such as the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, HR 676 & in certain aspects of the PATIENT PROTECTION and Affordable Care Act known as Obamacare.

I think we should also have more respect for Labor's situation in the middle of all of this, instead of undercutting them by threatening Democrats and thus undercutting the Presidents negotiating position(s) . . . but then, maybe that's the purpose of at least some of what we see going on, all of which ratcheted up geometrically by the NRA and gun owners everywhere.

[democrattotheend]

70. That really made me mad

When people started bashing not only the president and Nancy Pelosi but also people like Rich Trumka who have been tireless voices for working people. Unacceptable, IMO.

[patrice]

54. I wonder how many of the angry have actually read the text of Expanded & Improved Medicare for ALL

http://www.pnhp.org/sites/default/files/docs/2011/HR676-Feb-11-2011.pdf

Or are acquainted with Physicians for a National Health PROGRAM:

http://www.pnhp.org/

[patrice]

55. Or know the current status of that legislation on THOMAS:

http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php

[patrice]

57. I wonder how many of the angry (and please count me as one) have informed themselves about PCORI :

The PATIENT PROTECTION portion of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act known as Obamacare:

http://www.pcori.org/

[patrice]

61. I wonder how many of the angry screaming about Susan Rice know about John Kerry's UNION friends :

http://www.bluegreenalliance.org/apollo

But then maybe that WAS the point of the swiftboating going on on this board.

[patrice]

64. I think the angry would benefit from a little practice negotiation FUN at their next get-togethers :

http://www.eblong.com/zarf/werewolf.html