DNC solicited $ from me today - I said no

[Erika]

I told them I was outraged by democrats in D.C. voting for federal intervention in private personal family matters as in the Schiavo case. I want them to get the message loud and clear about federal interference in private personal choice matters.

[rockymountaindem]

1. Let me ask you one question.

Did you support Dean for the chairmanship?

[Erika]

8. Yes, I supported Dean

I donated to him during the primaries and again after he was elected chairman.

[rockymountaindem]

9. Ok.

Just curious.

[madfloridian]

14. So, I see.

That is your decision.

[ChiciB1]

45. I Said I Wouldn't Do It... But Did... Because

I wanted to help Howard Dean succeed. I gave them $75.00 about a month ago.

I keep getting letter from DCCC, I wrote them that they wouldn't get a penny from me until they started getting some back-bone. I just wrote in big red letter on their solicitation. I ignored the first request and they send another saying "maybe I overlooked their first request"! So I told them, "no I didn't" just don't write again.

[bugslsu9]

87. Hold on a second

I do not want to get into a shouting match, but the DCCC helps all of us candidates. If you do not like your member of Congress, do something about it, I am. I am running to replace an ultra-conservative who is President Bush's point man on Social Security. I am doing something about it, and let me assure you, I do have a backbone.

I need their help as well. I am running against a very well funded incumbent, and will most definately need the help of the DCCC. Please, do not, not donate simply because you feel that current members do not live up to your standards, instead think of those of us who are trying to stand up and shout, and need the help!

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

2. They called our house and asked for me the other day, too.

They'll have my vote for the governor's race (VA) in Nov., but that's it for now. I want to see more of them stand up for us like Barbara Boxer has done before I give any more $.

[mattclearing]

3. Good for you.

Maybe they will upgrade their email system to actually be able to make a note of such things.

Unless it was a phone solicitation, which I think might actually have a fair shot at getting written down somewhere.

The DNC is terrible about issues. It exists essentially to keep Democrats engaged and donating money.

[Frances]

4. Do you plan to give money to the Dems

who voted the way you wanted them to?

I don't have a lot of money but I usually give a small amount to Dems that do vote the way I would vote if I were in Congress.

[Erika]

11. I sent the DNC $ in 2004

and requested that not one cent be supplied to any democrat who backed the insane war in Iraq. I do back and donate individual candidates, such as Jim Jeffords, independent. In the general election, after other candidates were eliminated, I did donate to Kerry and I still have a Kerry/Edwards yard sign up.

I am a lifelong democrat but I'll be damned if I'll contribute to democrats who push growing the federal government to include their oversight of personal choice in private family matters.

We do need to get that message out loud and clear. If they want to grow federal government in private family issues, they won't get my $.

[Frances]

15. I gave a small amount to Jim Jeffords too

I have given to the DNC on occasion, but it is very empowering to give to an individual that you know you want to support.

[JI7]

5. so you will be giving to candidates you support/like directly instead ?

[welshTerrier2]

6. the problem is ...

I want them to get the message loud and clear

i thought i would post this before the inevitable parade of bashers comes along ... i hear your message ... not on this issue ... not on that issue ... but on all issues ...

too many Democrats do not feel like elected Democrats share power with them and give them a real voice on the issues ... the Party needs to address its rigid top-down structure ...

we have got to find a way to reform our intra-party communication processes ... and elected Democrats have got to be more responsive than they are to the grass roots (i.e. non-insider registered Democrats) ... it's not about lefties and its not about activists "being right all the time", it's about democracy ... and if we don't do it; more will act as you have ...

[BeatleBoot]

7. Wow, you really told 'em!

:hurts:

[Clarkie1]

10. I am glad you strongly expressed your feelings to them.

Good for you.

[madfloridian]

12. That's sad.

But it is your right. I thought people would be supportive and work to give the people a voice..but if you don't donate then you allow the corporations to keep the upperhand.

I figure if 200,000 Democrats gave $100 each, the party could collect 20 million just from the grassroots. That would not be a bad start.

I donated to candidates only last year, but this year I will show my support for the new chair. I happen to think it is not his fault they voted the way they did.

[Clarkie1]

17. You are correct it's sad and it's not Dean's fault.

He can't be expected to stongly influence votes of senators. If anything it would be part of the minority leader's role (Reid) to encourage his peers to follow the "party line" in the Senate (if there was a party line). I guess in this case it's not really clear if democrats as a party stood for the constitution or covering thier own hides. And that is sad. I'd like a party who believes upholding the constitution is the #1 priority.

I am glad this person expressed their opinion in the strongest way possible, but I'm not saying I think no one should donate to the DNC. I donated some when Dean became chair, but I do believe now my money towards victory in 06' will be going to WesPac. I agree with Clark that 100 years from now this country will be defined by its constitutional environment and its physical environment. That really is what matters to me most.

[madfloridian]

19. There you go.....that is what this is all about.

And Hilary PAC and Kerry PAC and Edwards PAC....we have been talking here in our area about all the PACs.

Yes, that is what you should do.

As I said....I ain't stupid. :shrug:

A lot of us know just what these "I'm not donating to the DNC" are all about. ;)

[Clarkie1]

22. I donated to the DNC when Dean became chair.

I did that because I felt the choice of Dean meant that the Democratic Party was going to start speaking with a stronger voice.

I'm not saying I will donate more to WesPac just because I believe Clark would be a great president. It's also sincerely because I know money and other efforts will be directed to candidates in 06' in a very targeted, strategic sort of way without wasting the money.

I do trust Clark to do that.

[madfloridian]

23. It is about WesPac, HilaryPac, EdwardsPAC, KerryPac....

and all the other PACs, three years ahead of time. Yes, it is.

It is really very obvious.

[Clarkie1]

24. I edited my message above for more clarity. n/t

[madfloridian]

25. So you will give to Clark instead of the party. I get it

That means you are saying he won't feel the need of the party? He will just have his own party? I am confused here. Is that what the others are doing as well?

And Hilary people can give to HilaryPAC, and so on and so on.

Gotcha loud and clear.

[Clarkie1]

26. No, I'm not saying that.

As I said, I gave to the DNC when Dean became chair.

There are so many great democratic causes (and other causes) to give to, so choices must be made. It may be Dean or the DNC will do something really inspiring to cause me to give to them in the future. Who knows? If I had unlimited funds, I would give them all I could.

[madfloridian]

28. So it is going to be a Clark thing, not a party thing.

This is what I am trying to get at. You know, like the requests I have been getting from the other former candidates...vague, including polls about my interests...but not really saying what it was about. Wanting money as well.

This is a concern. Last year we stopped donations to the party itself because of the lack of responsiveness to us. We feel like we got their attention, and the over 400 made their voices known for Howard Dean as chair.

So now all the other candidates are going to be about themselves? This is what I am trying to find out about all these PACs. I know what DFA is about, and they will not take money away from the DNC. The ones DFA supports are more local than DNC will deal with.

Now I am trying to figure out the PACs. They confuse me. The candidates who run will run under the name of the party, unless they are going to form their own 3rd party. Clark and the others will need the party in the long run. Why not work with it? Why withhold support from the party if they will run as DNC candidates in 08?

[Clarkie1]

34. I don't see PACs as "withholding support from the party"

Quite the opposite.

If Boxer, Edwards, Hillary, ect. can raise $$$ for their PACs that will be used to supported democratic candidates in 06', I say more power to them.

Why do you see this as a problem? If these PACs weren't in existence, it is unlikely that all the money that's going to them would be going to the DNC. The more money to democrats the better, right? Some will be inspired to donate by the DNC, some by other candidates; some may choose to donate to both.

I don't see this sort of activity by ANY of our democratic leaders as a problem. Example:

WesPAC History
WesPAC was founded by Wes Clark in April 2004 with a two-fold mission:

To elect Democrats to the White House and Congress in order to implement new policies that will restore our nation's security and prosperity, comprehensively address the threats facing America and our allies while respecting civil liberties, and replace the current unwise policies established by this Republican Administration and Congress.

To provide leadership on U.S. national security issues and develop new, innovative solutions to the challenges facing America at home and abroad.

To satisfy that mission during the 2004 campaign, WesPAC played a very active role in supporting those candidates who share our values:

Raised more than $1 million through fundraising events, fundraising solicitations, and PAC contributions for Democratic House and Senate candidates in critical races across America

Traveled to Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Missouri, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Washington to campaign for Democratic House and Senate candidates

Traveled to Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin, and his home state of Arkansas to campaign for John Kerry and John Edwards

[madfloridian]

36. It is late, had a long meeting tonight, tired.

Many of us see these PACs mostly for what they are...hanging to your base until 2008. I guess that is to be expected.

The danger comes when they will be running as DNC candidates, yet they have been soliciting money for themselves and candidates they want to run.

I am not the only one with concerns about this early early race building for 08. Trust me, I am not the only one.

The DNC will be expected to have funds on hand for candidates in 06 and 08....and believe me if they don't Dean will get blasted. Unfortunately, that would please many.

Forming PACs is one thing, forming this early for a presidential run is another.

Most of us in DFA are working and donating to both, and supporting the DNC completely. I guess we sort of thought others would do so as well.

But that is the business of each individual, isn't it? There are many agendas for sure. Your choice, your decision.

[Clark2008]

51. Stop badgering the Clarkie, please.

It's not YOUR money, mad.

Clarkie1 can do with his or her money as (s)he damn well sees fit.

This is as much of a personal matter as Schiavo.

Cut it out.

[madfloridian]

82. Not badgering, just totally understanding it now. Badgering the Clarkie?

Oh good grief.

Of course it is your choice. People realize what is going on a lot more than you think. Jumping on me, getting upset with me, saying I "badger the clarkie" is just plain silly.

The problem exists, and going after me does not help.

[tsuki]

54. I understand what you are saying, but my local is more than broke.

We had no monies last election other than those we raised locally. We had no "presence," no visible headquarters, no money for rallies, etc.

I understand the need for the DNC to raise money, but now it is important to build the local.

I will continue to support the DNC, but they take a backseat to the local.

[madfloridian]

83. Did you know the plan is to get more money to the states?

Dean has made that clear, his goal is to have 4 DNC staffers in each state by the end of the year to help build the parties.

Giving to your state and your local DEC is good. That was not my point.

I think a lot of support for the 2006 elections is being drained by the ones who are already running for president...maybe. Maybe they are running, maybe not.

I think a lot of it is planned to withhold support. No, will not provide a link.

[tsuki]

94. I posted this morning

'Says Rep. Bonner in his defense of the War:

"The great thing about this country is if you don't like it, you can leave."

I just wrote a check to the DNC and donated it in the name of Rep. Jo Bonner...

Anyone willing to join me?'

I got one response. What are we supposed to do, MadFL? I sent my donation.

[ElectroPrincess]

57. Lighten up please madfloridian ...

You have taught me in a real but curt way to not ever confuse the DLC with Howard Dean. I doubt if that gleaned you a lot of progressive support but, because I can humble myself, THANKS sincerely for the education.

However, there's no way you can FORCE people to believe that Dean will make any significant difference in the DNC. I strongly believe that "the DNC machine" will swallow up and change Dean, not Dean change the system.

I have no love lost for the DNC and that does NOT make me a bad democrat but a true "liberal."

Guess I'm one of those folks who believes that God hates a quitter. In a similar fashion, I will not leave my beloved Catholic faith although I'm profoundly disappointed with the leadership of The Church.

The Democratic Party can be rebuilt once the "corporate loving" DINOS are washed out. The DNC loves corporate money far more than they cherish their constituents, ergo they will not get one cent from me.

[madfloridian]

84. I lost support because I corrected you on DLC/DFA? I am not running.

Is that what you are saying? Is there a group that decided to withhold support from me now? I need support from progressives?

I am confused. I am not running for office.

So in effect you are of the thought that the party is already dead and nothing we do can fix it?

That is your right, and at least you are honest. In case you are not aware, I am just a poster here. I don't need "support."

I am also well up on what goes on in other forums about me. Well aware. So are many others. Since I am not running for office, I wonder why you would say those things. Hmmmm...mmm..

[madfloridian]

88. Sounds like you are advocating destruction of the party.

I hope I am wrong. There is a difference between working to change it and getting our voice back from the corporations, and just saying to let the party fail.

I think you are saying to let it fail.

I can not FORCE anything on anyone, especially someone who actually confused the DFA with the DLC and then got mad at me when corrected.

I can argue my point though. Perhaps you should lighten up on me.

[Erika]

20. Give people a voice?

There is no poll that shows the majority of Americans supported federal government interference into private personal matters of choice such as in the Schiavo case, just the opposite. Yet, the D.C. democrat senators voiced unanimous approval to allow federal intervention in matters of personal choice. They silenced our voice and until they change course I'll be damned if I contribute to them.

Harkin and Frank think the feds belong in such matters? I don't quite think so. The DNC has access to my donation records and if enough of us say give us a voice or we'll give you no $, they will listen.

[Gloria]

32. Yeah, Harkin and Frank are first in line to enable Bush AGAIN...

this time on the Federal courts.

I am feeling that all the GOP and about 1/2 - 3/4 of the Democrats are not to be trusted.

I have refused donating 3 times (by phone request). I was ready to donate a large chunk for the sake of Dean. But I think he's being undermined. I don't have a lot of extra money, so I won't donate for the forseeable future. I'm still waiting for Democrats to stand up and stop enabling Bush!! I'm waiting for more of a unified bloc, which I doubt will ever happen. Lieberman, Biden, even Hilary talk too much. Now Frank and Harkin are trying to push a bill that no one is clamoring for, for what???? Reid doesn't seem to be controlling his group of Senators very well...

[flpoljunkie]

63. What you are saying makes sense, but they kicked us in the teeth and sided

with the big banks and corporations right out of the gate. Did they think we would not notice?

And I am actually thinking of giving no more money to the DSCC, DCCC or the DNC--if the one-sided bankruptcy bill passes without major changes--which looks likely.

First, they let class action lawsuit "reform" pass, then the egregious, one-sided bankruptcy bill, a giveaway to the banks and credit card companies, and then drilling in ANWR got put in the budget resolution where it passed.

Stopping Social Security is not enough. Next up for the Rethugs is Medical Malpractice "reform"--the Doctors and HMO Relief Act and Dubya's energy bill, written by and for Big Oil.

Corporations are getting their wish lists fulfilled, one by one. When the last item is crossed off the list, the Rethugs can then pull the "nuclear option" and the Senate will stop functioning--with election reform left undone.

The Rethugs will have accomplished all their goals, and will blame the Democrats for shutting down the Senate, and the cowardly, corporate media will willingly repeat Rove's talking points.

If the Democrats cannot stand for economic justice, they stand for nothing. Their record, so far, is not encouraging, to say the least.

[GetTheRightVote]

13. I am for donating to Dr Dean to show the Dems that he is the reason why

they are getting the funds and perhaps they should follow his lead for once. We need to start somewhere it should be with an obvious backer of the grass roots like the new chairman.

:kick:

[Ugnmoose]

16. When they call here is what I tell them

I say when you start acting like an opposition party you get my financial support. Now grow some balls or don't call me. They usually thank me for my opinion and hang up.

P.S. During the 2000 election cycle I regularly gave to support the DNC and other local Dem organizations. I personally believe that Dean was elected unanimously because even those that oppose his views feel he is the only person who can raise money for the Party at this time.

[madfloridian]

18. Wait...you think he can raise money, but you withhold support?

Now I am really confused. He can not effect change within the party without a showing of support from the people, from the grassroots.

But then I realize what these posts are really about. I ain't stupid. :shrug:

[Ugnmoose]

27. I am reserving judgment

I think Howard Dean is a breath of fresh air and was a ravid supporter of his Presidential campaign. I did not say I will not support the DNC, I simply said I want them to show us they can act like an opposition party. For God sakes you can't get the Dems to vote consistently on anything. Yet the Repukes fall in line like a bunch of lemmings. We have to stop being so g=dammed politically correct, take off the white gloves and slap some faces.

Frankly, I think the system is too corrupt at this point to give us what we want. There are too many special interests to serve and too much money at stake. Until we clean this up and get government back in the hands of the people we will continue to get this partisan crap.

[madfloridian]

29. Then withhold support and it will fail.

The party will have to rely once again on the corporate wing of the party. So we lose because people withhold support. Makes sense.

[zulchzulu]

21. The DNC can't control DINO votes...they need your money

I understand your point, but the DNC folks asking for money are far removed from some DINOs that tend to stray off course.

If we all based giving contributions based on waiting for "perfect" records, we may as well give up now and just hand it all over to the Repugs.

[madfloridian]

30. Thank you.

I will choose to donate only to certain candidates, but withholding support from the party organization is a dangerous thing now. I will fuss at candidates I consider DINOs, and in most cases will vote for them if there is no other choice.

I hope there will be other choices in the primaries.

[Erika]

31. Harkin & Frank are not DINO's

Both want a federal voice in private personal matters of choice.

They can want as they wish but without my donations.

[madfloridian]

33. If you want change, you have to work to get it.

We won a big battle, the people part of the party, by getting Dean in as chair. He can't work miracles, but it is a start. It is not good to withhold support for things that are beyond his control at this point.

But that is your right.

[Mass]

65. Where did Frank ever vote for that??

He voted AGAINST the Schiavo law and led on that issue.

He called for a discussion so that people can express themselves. He never said what was in the law, but he talked to organizations he respects and saw they had concerns about the situation.

Now, if you think this country should not held discussions on important matters, it is your right. I just do not agree.

[ElectroPrincess]

59. The DNC does NOT give a damn about us constituents ...

Life will be hell no matter what, but I'd rather keep my dignity and not kiss their corporate loving butts. These people are so damn arrogant, they MUST be destroyed to re-establish a Democratic Party that will represent the people.

But don't worry, like cockroaches a few DNC DINOS will survive to suck off the corporate teats while cheating working class America.

These people are even more despicable than Republicans because they are SUPPOSE to represent us. We are being shined on while the DNC DINOS are getting regular pay-offs from the fortune 500.

[MaineDem]

67. I don't know anyone in the DNC getting payoffs

I believe you're totally incorrect.

[ElectroPrincess]

70. Believe what you will but they are being "set up" for life by corporate

America. If they are not being paid now, you can bet that, if they are loyal to corporations, they will nab a cushy position upon their departure from Congress. Check the record.

[MaineDem]

71. What are you talking about?

You said the DNC and now you're talking about Congress. Two very different groups.

[ElectroPrincess]

73. I was addressing the claim that ALL Democrats are Pure ... untrue

[footinmouth]

35. I won't be donating either

I feel betrayed that they didn't stand up to government interference in personal family matters. I simply cannot send them my money. I'll probably vote for them just because I will not vote for a Republican, but right now I'm just too mad to donate any money.

[Erika]

37. Agreed

If the Dems wish to vote with the GOP,let them but they won't get my donations.

[madfloridian]

40. Then don't donate, Erika. Just don't.

If that makes you happy, just don't do it.

[Pirate Smile]

79. I want to be a permanent minority party. I won't donate either!

:eyes:

[NAO]

38. The only thing more disgusting than the DC Dems right now...

The only thing more disgusting than the DC Dems right now...are the DC Repubs, and there will be more of them in '06 unless we empower the less disgusting of the two.

We need to take a lesson from the Religious Reich, whose triumphant march we have been witnessing lately. They were abhorred and disgusted with the Republican Party; but the continued to build their base and to support their party, even though it was deeply flawed in many ways from their perspective. Eventually they got to a point where they got their party in power, and then they crossed their arms and told the Repubs, "well, who do you think got you in power? You OWE us".

We need to support and empower Dems, even ones we are disgusted with, because things sure as hell are only going to get worse if we do nothing at all and allow the the mongrel hoards of Bible-beating, tax-cutting, poor-despising, environment-raping, union-busting, treasury-bankrupting, warmongers, aka the Republican Party, to continue to seize power unopposed.

I send small, regular contributions to the DNC and my state Democratic Party, even when they fall short of my ideals. I see the Democratic Party, flawed though it may be, as our only hope of stopping the NeoCon/Dominionist onslaught.

*****

The Swift Advance of a Planned Coup: Conquering by Stealth and Deception - How the Dominionists Are Succeeding in Their Quest for National Control and World Power
http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/TheSwiftAdvanceOfaPlannedCoup.htm

[madfloridian]

39. Kudos.

Nice post.

[Erika]

41. The Neocons GOP are joined by the Dems &

I'll be damned if I'll support them monetarily. Republicans are thought to be as normal sheeple but I'll be damned if I will be a sheeple to dems who vote to support the Bush agenda.

Read it clear, I will not give $ to democrats who support big government programs and Bush.

[madfloridian]

43. Then just don't donate. You don't have to announce it publicly.

Just don't do it. Making a public announcement is not good.

[Erika]

47. So write up the PC rules

as to how to announce my displeasure.

[madfloridian]

49. Do it anyway you wish.

.

[NAO]

44. If you do not give dollars to Dems who support SOME Bush programs

your chosen inaction will be empowering rabid Repubs who will enthusiastically support ALL Bush programs.

Without the support of the people, the Democratic Party will be further incapacitated and the Repubs will be able to pursue their destructive programs COMPLETELY UNOPPOSED.

***

Just a note, supporting very progressive third party candidates - people who truly embody my personal values and ideals - is tantamount to supporting the Republican Party because it splits the progressive Dem votes and the moderate Dem votes. The GOP did not even try to disguise this in 2004 - they actively and fairly openly funded Nader.

They remember why Bush Sr. lost in 1992 - it was not Clinton's dynamic charisma - it was because part of the Republican base voted for Ross Perot.

This does not apply to supporting progressive Democratic Party candidates. Nor does it apply to supporting progressive PACs. Advancing progressive frames and ideology is how we move the Democratic Party to the left.

The Christian Right did not form a "Christian Right Party". They held their noses and supported the Republican Party, and gradually engulfed and commandeered the party. If they had formed a "Christan Party", right now we would have a Democrat in the White House, with a Democratically controlled House and Senate...

[divineorder]

52. Also, we need to think strategically and long-term

Dean is reviving the party by reviving local party orgs and encouraging DFA to continue and grow. We got tutu-wearers precisely because the local fighters dropped out, aged out or got discouraged. If we don't support Dean's efforts, the money won't be there to move the fighters up the political ladder when the tutu wearers finally retire. The Repugs are already ready and have people in the process to line up-we won't unless we stop whining and start working. Remember too, that the Repugs have been able to work local government (ala Jeb) as well, and we need to give national Dems both a backup and a source of replacements. Stronger local support can enable courage. The Repugs could demonize Daschle precisely because he had little institutional support in his home state.

But it takes time to do. Dean has only been in his post for a month, and he has been traveling pretty constantly trying to shore up the local parties since. His fundraiser in Mississippi kept the Democratic Party office open! Also, we have a lot of institution-building work to do. The Young Dems need support, Lakeoff needs to have not just books and classes, but a whole goddam think tank of people surrounding him. There are plenty of places to put your money-if you are willing to work for the long term.

And get involved yourself. Join your local DFA and support all progressive candidates including a few Greens.

[madfloridian]

42. Let's just all stop donating right now.

Since they all don't vote the way we want, let's not donate to make things better.

Yes, that is what we should do. Just don't support the party because Dean in his first month as chair did not whip everyone into shape.....even though the DC insiders who voted like we did not like did not want Dean anyway.

Yes, you guys are right on there. Withhold support, let the corporations have it all to themselves. Then they will have to keep voting for who they got the money from...for their agenda.

This is an excellent idea. We have a chance to take some of it back from the corporate wing, but darn it, they did not vote right. So let's tell Howard Dean he had a whole month to shape em up and failed.

Yes, that is how you rebuild a party.

:think: :crazy: :silly: :freak: :hurts: :wow:

[Erika]

46. I will be damned if I vote for a party who disallows choice

I monetarily supported Dean in the primary and after his election as chair. I will not support a party who votes to allow federal intervention on personal family matters. You may not like it but so be it. I am so disappointed that the democratic U.S. Senators did not have the spine to stand up and stop the interference. Harkin and Frank disgust me as they push federal intervention into private family matters.

[madfloridian]

48. Did you see my post earlier?

The uncompromising left will hurt our country as surely as the uncompromising right.

They are equally dangerous in their demand for perfection.

Sometimes we take what we have and work from there.

But you don't have to do that. I have said to you several times in this thread....just don't donate. No will force you. If enough withhold support, the party will revert to the corporate donors. Dean will have failed in his mission to get a place at the table for us.

[Erika]

50. Is Dean coming out as to support him versus corporations?

Sorry guys, but Dean was just another child of privilege who never knew any hardship. Now you are telling us to mute our voice?

[divineorder]

53. Erika

The people who are at least going to listen to you are Dem. And that crack about "child of privilege". Roosevelt was a "child of privilege" as well, but we had no greater worker for the poor and disadvantaged. Kennedy, LBJ, were hardly starving either, but they championed civil rights and one even created "The Great Society". Being rich does not automatically deprive you of compassion and a sense of being able to see the greater good, just as being able-bodied doesn't necessarily mean you can't emphasize with the ill. In fact, at times, if the values are right, they may make even more effective champions. Because they aren't worried about their pile, they can spend extra time on this without having to make deals. Do you know that DNC Party Chair makes no salary? I know that doesn't make sense, but you have to wonder if that doesn't limit both our choices. Dean made his money through his work and investments and can afford to do this.

Also, as we have seen with a few conservo-whores, sometimes people who move up the ladder are so needing of approval from the upper ranks that they will betray the interests of the folks they came from for that support and approval. Hardly class solidarity!

We have two choices: between Dems who will at least care, and Repubs who could care less whether or not you have a voice at all.

[ElectroPrincess]

69. IMO you speak the truth. The DNC is a kinder gentler corporate worshiper

Madfloridian IMO you keep PROCLAIMING FALSEHOODS! (beating a dead horse) Just because you reword it emphatically, does NOT make the DNC loyal to their constituents when they are NOT.

The DNC's downfall is much like that will occur to the Right Wing Republicans: Their Arrogance. The DNC thinks that their constituents are as "clueless" as the Republican sheeple.

The DNC does NOT fight Corporate America. They are, albeit more low key, LOVERS of Corporate payola.

In essence, the DNC has almost completed it transformation into "Republican Lite."

Nope, not one more cent until they wake up and truly represent the Working and Middle Class America.

[ElectroPrincess]

61. Uncompromising?!? When in the last four years has * been told "no".

We've compromised (Gutless Democrats in the Senate) ourselves to obscurity. Save for a few filibusters against Federal Judges, no one dare say "No" to Bush Co.

Hell, the world looks at us "in fear" as * and his warmongers took us to war against the United Nations.

I'm a consummate compromiser, but the Republican leadership will not allow Democrats at the table. At THAT point of no return, it's time to fight back.

The Senate is like "a troop" being beaten by his Drill Sergeant. After each blow (absolute defeat - no opportunity for compromise), our Democratic Leadership exclaim, "Thank you Sir! May I have another?"

The present Republican leadership are like petulant children who own all the toys, there's ZERO opportunity to compromise.

I want the Democratic Leadership to fight for the little that we can hold onto - "No far Right Wing Religious Fundamentalist judges."

If Reid does not stand firm on the above issue, we are in need of a massive "house cleaning" otherwise The Democratic Party will forever represent "the abused child" of the Republican Party.

[madfloridian]

85. You want the Dems to fight, so you withhold money so they can't.

Makes good sense to me.

[Mass]

66. I love people who know what others wants before they have talked.

And btw, why is state better than federal in this case?? Just curious.

It seems to me that either there is no review of the case (meaning that your spouse has all the right on the decision if you cant express yourself (could be OK with me as I trust my husband) or you allow a full appeal if you think that there should be an appeal right. I dont see why there should be a position where the State courts could review the case, but not the federal courts. (It is in fact the legislation that Harkin is said to propose).


And Frank is not a US Senator anyway.

[MaineDem]

68. I'm confused

Barney Frank was leading the fight against the Schiavo bill. What are you talking about?

[Mass]

75. I guess it refers to this

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/apwashington_story.asp?category=1153&slug=Congress%20Schiavo



Legislatively, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, an advocate for the disabled, is working on a bill to provide for additional federal court review in cases where the wishes of the incapacitated person are not known and there is a dispute among family members.




He said he was heartened that Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a sharp critic of the Schiavo bill that Congress eventually passed, on Sunday told ABC's "This Week" that Congress needs to look at improving the procedures, "because I've spoken with a lot of disability groups who are concerned that even where a choice is made to terminate life, it might be coerced by circumstance."

[sandnsea]

93. They voted for a court review

Let's be clear on what they did. They only voted for a federal court review. The federal court said, no thank you. That's it, that's all.

[BlueManDude]

55. I gave to the DNC but said no to the DCCC and DSCC

[CWebster]

56. The sad irony is

the very reason Dean was so stunningly successful at raising funds was because he held the promise of articulating the Democratic message. That was the point. And now?

[MaineDem]

58. DNC working to strengthen grassroots

Honestly, it is. The DNC has promised each state and territory Party at least $200,000 to beef up the grassroots. If the DNC doesn't get donations that money won't be there to strengthen the local level of the party. That's where we need the work. We need each state to have a viable political organization, a good website with a blog, training for the local people. Some states are already good at this but others, sadly, have nothing.

Chairman Dean has promised a 50-state effort. That can't happen without help from Democrats like you.

I understand your frustration but, unfortunately perhaps, it is money from contributors that will make the difference in each of our states and territories.

[sendero]

60. I said yes...

... and gave them a donation. I think the DNC might actually be an asset to the party now.

[ElectroPrincess]

64. Perhaps - Guess time will tell ...

I concur with the great social scientists "The Who" <snicker>

The New Boss (Dean) will prove to be the SAME as the Old Boss.

I know that there's many folks who love Howard Dean but he has already had a zap on his brain by being leader of the DNC. He's being assimilated by the DNC Borg.

Bottom line - we're screwed. I do what I can with my local Democratic organization but, on a national level, the system is rigged by corporate America. You can bet the DNC is being paid off up to their eyeballs NOT to harm God, i.e., the multinational corporations.

[sendero]

72. The Who should know..

... they are the biggest sellouts of all time.

[ElectroPrincess]

74. Yep, but my vote (biggest sell-outs) goes to Led Zeppelin ...

Arrrgh! Why a friggin Cadillac commercial. LOL :spank:

[sendero]

76. For sheer quantity...

... nobody beats the Who. :)

[ElectroPrincess]

81. What ever ... it was offered as an antidote not etched in stone - Rock on!

[Donna Zen]

62. Democrat in a red county

The state Democrat party and the DNC pay no attention to our local Democratic committee, a situation that we have addressed repeated, only to be ignored. So for the time being, my check book comes out for local needs.

Some have said that the PACs are targeted at 08 races. Perhaps. Although I did give to a presidential campaign, only to see that money now sitting in Kerry's account. But beyond that, for all of the talk about a New DNC, I'm watching while Hillary's spokespeople and busy bees are being placed in key positions at the DNC. Same ole same ole.

As a teacher living under the unfunded mandate known as No Child Left Behind, aka, no public school left opened, (thanks Dems.) I don't have much money. I will give where it best used and most needed.

[madfloridian]

86. Ok, you claimed that before. Name them all. Proof.

I want you to name the Hilary people. Not just Karen, but all of them. You have said before that payoffs are going on. I want you to present some proof.

[Donna Zen]

89. Her spokes person now the DNC spokes person

People who are eager to see a Hillary Rodham Clinton angle in nearly every Washington personnel move -- and three years before the next presidential election, there are plenty of those -- will enjoy a frisson from the latest machinations at the Democratic National Committee. The new communications director for the party is Karen Finney, who served as deputy press secretary in the first lady's office during the Clinton years. She was also a spokeswoman for Clinton's successful Senate campaign in New York in 2000.


Finney's move is part of a shuffling at the DNC under new Chairman Howard Dean. She is replacing Jano Cabrera, who said he is headed to a beach in Maui and will announce longer-term plans by May 1. Research director Jason Miner is also moving on, and will be replaced by Mike Gehrke, who like Finney worked in the Clinton White House, and later did research for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.


As for Hillary Clinton's political network, it's been a busy month, with longtime friend and Democratic operative Harold Ickes taking over America Coming Together the influential labor-backed political group, and New York-based consultant Howard Wolfson taking on a contract to shape strategy at the state Democratic Party in New York.

WaPo

Mad, I understand that this is how the inside works. I'm not surprised... there is nothing I can do about it. But if you think that backs are not being scratched, well, fine. I was told in June of 2004 by a cabinet member that the ticket will be Hillary in 2008. I said, What, what about John Kerry? To which the person replied, Well, the party questions the win. The person was very excited about the Hillary run, and thought I should be too. C'est la vie.

I think I've seen others lower on the food chain mentioned. I'll see what I can find.

If I said "pay back" I'm sorry. I do think that Dean, who is certainly an improvement over what was going on, is still a politician. You don't think that. Okay.

[madfloridian]

90. Are you aware Finney was with Elizabeth Edwards as well?

Yes, Dean is a politician, of course. But stretching to say Ickes and ACT are Dean-related is a little much, even for the WP.

Are you aware that most of the Dean campaign staff, now DFA, were in the Clinton WH? They were with Gore on his campaign, and they are strong with Dean. It is more a Gore thing than a Clinton thing.

Dean named Tom McMahon as executive director. He was head of DFA, also was with Gore, and was in the WH in an advisory capacity.

These people he has named so far have worked with so many people. That article was trying to divide.

I am very impressed with a lot of the choices, and it looks very fair, with even a Lieberman guy as advisor.

It does not matter, really. As I say, a lot of us are very aware of what is going on. Not much to do about it either.

If you think I don't know about candidates being pre-chosen, think again. There are many layers of deceptions that have occurred. It is not possible to go there.

Here is more on Karen Finney
"Karen Finney, our new Communications Director, was
most recently Deputy Chief of Staff for Senator Debbie Stabenow.
Prior to working on the Hill, Karen served as Director of
Communications for Elizabeth Edwards and Press Secretary for Senator
Hillary Clinton during her senate campaign."

[Donna Zen]

91. Are you saying that Karen doesn't lean Hillary?

I guess you know.

Mad_ yes, I do think we are working in a "pre-chosen" world. The article was playing the hype for Hillary card, but was not negative about the choices.

Two other insiders, both lawyers who have worked for both parties, also said in December, it was Hillary. Personal conversations, no link. I never said that Ickes and Dean were related, although I think they've made their peace. I do think that Ickes, head of HillPAC being now head of ACT, is rather convenient. Hmmmm? I wonder where the union endorsements will go?

So the party's lining up. Not much to be done about it as you say. I'll just keep attending meetings, duct taping my mouth, and hoping to get rid of the junta. Nevertheless, in many ways I understand why the Democratic party has disgruntled many on the liberal side of the equation. And yes, I am hanging by a thread. Politics without a core set of beliefs beyond the individual personalities involved is not concerned with the "common good." And that sums up Hillary Clinton for me.

[madfloridian]

92. Are you aware of Dean's comments on 08?

"I ain't getting involved"

[trogdor]

77. I am a "sustaining member" already.

$20/mo. charged to my Capital One card. It's more than most people do. Considering I still have a credit card balance, it's more than enough already.

[Califooyah Operative]

78. punishing the wrong people. nt

[cestpaspossible]

80. Gee, that was stupid.