55 years as a Democrat and it all boils down to one vote

[Hamlette]

if I don't win I'm going to join a third party and insure that the religiously insane right wing stay in power for another generation.

By damn, that's exactly what I'm about. Forget that the Dems brought us Social Security, Unemployment, Medicare, Medicaid, civil rights, pro choice, a fair tax, a great educational system etc. Alito lied about something so I'm through with all of you!

And it doesn't matter that Clinton lied, that's different.

I'm going to call Alito names, just like Rush does to us, and show those damn moderates Dems who are nothing but Republicans anyway.

There is no room in this party for people who have different views from mine. I'm leaving.

[NMDemDist2]

1. ROFL i think you forgot your "sarcasm" smilie

cuz I know you're just joshing me....

:hi:

us old dogs gotta show these kids how to hang in and fight the good fight eh?

[MisterP]

39. letting Alito in isn't "fighting the good fight"

[NMDemDist2]

41. they haven't voted yet now have they? n/t

[ixion]

2. yeah, you're right... pass me the

Kool-Aid® and I'll dust off my DLC handbook. :eyes:

[davidwparker]

3. May I suggest the Green party. It seems most real Dems are there.

Didn't the Greens protest Ohio? I think so.

[calico1]

7. Yes, that's it!

I'm going to join the Green party. Maybe Nader will be on the ticket again. Woohoo! I will vote to take a stand. Its not important the Republicans lose power right? I will vote for third party candidates which will split the Democratic vote and keep Republicans in office! We will all be screwed but my values and principles will be intact! :crazy:

[davidwparker]

15. Each has to do what they are comfortable with. The poster is fed up

with the Dem party and decides to take a stand by leaving. I've not reached that part yet. I'm giving it the '06 and '08 elections for Dean to get it together and for Dems with backbone to stand up (Clark, Hackett). If Republican-lite is the best the Dems can do, let it die.

If the current leadership, cannot make hay of the problems with this country and its fascists leadership more than it currently is doing, then it is DEAD already. It exists to rubber stamp the Republican agenda and to give it "bipartisan support." :puke:

[crispini]

23. The poster is being sarcastic.

Check out some of the other threads referencing this subject.

[bear425]

4. Thank you for posting this. I know what you really mean.

Now let's let the people who keep saying this for real take a look at this. I'm beginning to think there are MANY, MANY high post freepers here. k&r

[crispini]

5. Bwahahahahahahahaha!

Good one. :thumbsup:

[Selatius]

6. You'll just split the vote like Nader did

Go ahead and join a third party. The fact of the matter is that our electoral system was built in such a way that ONLY two parties are really viable. This is according to Duverger's Law. (You should wiki it sometime) The Greens have little hope of winning power at the national level.

You want to know why? Because if you go Green, you will be attacked by your former colleagues the Democrats as badly as the Republicans would. Political parties, by nature, are established to seize and hold power and guard it against all comers. If you think you can go Green without being attacked by Democrats, let me tell you something:

You're in for a rude surprise. :(

[katinmn]

14. I'm witnessing Centrist Dems attacking Progressive Dems

who are seeking endorsement. I've never seen such attack dogs, even when the progressive is the only Dem running against a Repuke! And of course the progressive candidates who are trying to address issues like the war and healthcare are the newcomers.

Progressives are not being warmly welcomed into the Democratic Party, at least in Minnesota. Centrist Dems are driving progressives to the Green Party.

Repeat
Centrist Dems are driving progressives to the Green Party.

[Selatius]

19. Well, if you vote Green, you'll still split the vote

They know that, and you know that. They will sheer apart the progressives if they can using that fact. This is the US. This is not some European country where you have several parties you can vote for. You are given two viable parties, and that's all you are given. If you don't like this restrictive arrangement, then tough luck because that's all you're getting in this country. It's sad, but that's the way this republic is set up.

You're only option, politically speaking, is to fight or die within the party. Running to the Greens simply means you'll get gunned down a lot quicker by fellow Democrats. Only a few have ever won power outside the major parties.

[katinmn]

21. I guess I didn't articulate my point

The DC Dem strategists are not only not supporting, they're putting roadblocks in front of people who want to run on anti-war, universal healthcare, civil rights platforms, when that's what the people want. Fortunately, we have some progressive Dems and a lot of Greens who have stepped forward to fill the void. And there will be a fight.

Now, you can talk tough and say live or die within the party, but I don't accept that. There is a major movement taking place in this country to reject corporate owned candidates and party puppets.
You can get on board with that or you can support the status quo.

Pogressives will make significant gains, enough to influence policies, which the current crew has been unwilling to do.

[AuntiBush]

29. I like that last line...

"Pogressives will make significant gains, enough to influence policies, which the current crew has been unwilling to do."

Must admit, the Progessives have been working tirelessly, while the rest of us are getting no where fast.

Thanks, katinmn. Now, I'm understanding life a bit more. Yet, the Dems need all the votes they can get right now.

Now, if we can get the Dems back in charge, maybe, maybe then the Green Party...

[AuntiBush]

24. Exactly!!!!!

It will split the votes and "the opposing side knows this!"

We've got a lot of chips down here. No longer can we afford to turn our votes to a third party right now. Not this year.

If so, you're sadly going to get what you mentioned. I don't think you really want that now, do you? <--- Line meant for the above poster, not the one I'm responding to.

Sorry about that. :hi:

[katinmn]

25. Hey, You...Come over to the sunshine!

Get back to the Democratic ideals that made this a once great country.

We can do it. Solidarity.

[AuntiBush]

26. LOL I am a TRUE BLUE DEMOCRAT....

I understand "completely," I do, and have had a few moments myself thinking heavily of joining the Green Party. Not only do I like their values, and what they stand for, I appreciate and respect all the hard-work they've done.

I must admit, I do think about it quite frequently. But I also am fully aware that right now we need all the votes we can get to fight the neocons that have infested our once great nation. If I thought the Dems could make it on their own, I might reconsider.

Till then, I'm a "true blue Democrat." LOL Thanks for that invite though... hmmmmmmm...... It is a thought, though. :)

[katinmn]

30. I haven't switched parties. I'm working for individual candidates

A progressive Dem (governor) and a Green (state house of representatives).

In Minnesota we don't have to announce parties or sign anything. I have to decide whose caucus I'm going to, though.

[LoZoccolo]

36. No one can drive you to the Green Party but yourself.

People need to quit pinning their faulty decision-making, which has cost thousands of lives already, on other people.

[radio4progressives]

44. Oh Yeah? You're doing a pretty goddam good job of it.. Seems to be your

goal and only agenda, given all posts. At least it sure seems to be your M.O. if not your intent.

and if it isn't your intention, you ought to question your actions because that's how it's seen by others (but you know that).

[LoZoccolo]

46. Don't blame me...

...for your lack of a plan to get what you want, or pointing out that that's the case.

[Matariki]

49. I'd like to remind people that Gore didn't lose

and Nader didn't 'split the vote'.

In fact there was a very good effort to make sure that states where the electoral vote for Gore was in jeopardy folks *didn't* vote for Nader.

The point was NOT to get Nader in the Whitehouse but to get the Green party on future ballots as a 'legitimate' party by getting at least 5% of the vote.

[DistressedAmerican]

8. I Am Not Saying I Am With That Crowd. But, This Is Final Straw For Many

not the only straw as you would like to portray it.

[katsy]

9. The feeling of hopelessness & frustration

make people say things they may not necessarily follow through on.

It is my hope that Greens, Socialists & Dems work together.

[rodeodance]

12. yes, i hope so also. would hate to see another Florida, 2000 with Ralph.

[Joe for Clark]

10. I appreciate the sarcasm.

Pretty funny.

Joe

[katinmn]

11. All those great programs you mentioned are in decline

for lack of love and attention.

Those Old School Dems got those measures passed.

This new bunch needs to pick up the pace!

[donco6]

13. Gawd, no kidding.

If I see one more "they better do what I want or I'm leaving" post I'm gonna puke.

[electropop]

27. They'd better do what we want (restore democracy) or we're ALL leaving...

to Gitmo. The Fascist takeover is nearly complete and it's no time for timid voices and half-measures.

[kevsand]

16. It seems that not even Democrats understand democracy.

Folks like you and I have been at it long enough to know that you don't always get absolutely everything you want. In fact, we're lucky to get half of it. That is how it works when things are done by committee, and this country is simply the largest committee in the history of mankind.

I don't really expect that the posters who you are teasing here will get it, though. Ideological puritans aren't exactly known for their sense of humor (or patience, for that matter). I suppose they'll flame out in a blaze of frustration, as usual. Then the rest of us can finish our tea, pick up the pieces, and start over again tomorrow...

[DancingBear]

17. What many who are upset are saying is this:

If it's OK, I will use your examples in terms of TODAY"S Democratic Party;

Social Security - would have been derided as "welfare giveaway" by Bush - Democrats would have backed down

Unemployment - Bush would crow about strong economy, Republicans would frame it as laziness on the part of those not willing to work -Democrats would have backed down

Medicare - "Socialized Medicine", "Hillary Health Care Plan" - Dem's would be MIA on this one

Medicaid - see above

Civil rights - see "don't ask, don't tell", see "gay marriage" - look for ANY Democrats currently pushing to make this an issue - collect 5 bonus points if you find one

Pro Choice - see "Alito, Samuel", also see "filibuster", "Feinstein, Diane", "Nelson, Ben"

etc.

The problem with many of us (and I think I include myself with regards to many of these concerns) is not what we've done, but what we WILL do.

I honestly do not believe that this present Democratic Party has the balls to enact anything like you mentioned.

I hope every day to be proved wrong.

[Hamlette]

22. today's democratic party?

might I take you on a trip down memory lane and introduce you to former Senator Eastland of Mississippi who retired from the US Senate in 1978. You can find out more about him here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Eastland

About half the Dems in the Senate at the time were just like him. In fact, only about 20 identified themselves as liberal.

Or Scoop Jackson? Boss of Richard Perle, Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams and Doug Feith and BIG war hawk. Of course, he was in bed with Boeing so maybe that had something to do with the fact that he loved war and hated detente.

Or the fact that during a 10 year war in Vietnam which was just as illegal and obscene as this one we couldn't elect an anti war Dem, in part because half the party supported THAT evil war.

And even JFK. Boy, those were the days, Bay of Pigs, not doing anything about the continuing civil rights abuses in the South.

And for 40 years we had congress AND the white house and couldn't get a universal health care plan. And social security was so limited it only applied to about 10% of the retirement age population.

And while we're on the subject, why didn't they filabuster Thomas or Scalia or Rhenquist? Oh, that's right, those were REAL Democrats who were all liberal and full of fight! By Damn!

[DancingBear]

28. Yep -today's Democratic Party

Amazingly enough, I lived through that era, so perhaps (unlike you?) I have no need for wikipedia.

I find it curious that you left out LBJ, but perhaps that did not fit the response you wished to sculpt. He's the guy that came AFTER Kennedy, and I believe he may have done a few things in that civil rights arena.

Now, I seem to recall a bunch of Dems fighting (ah, there's the operative word, yes?) for things like reducing the voting age to 18, the Equal Rights Amendment, Watergate, ending the war - you know, stuff that like, well, DEMOCRATS actually care about.

The end sum game is not what matters always, it's how one approaches the battle. Many of those battles were, as you say, lost, but we FOUGHT them. There were defined differences between the parties then.

Oh, and about the filibuster. Neither Thomas, nor Scalia, nor Rehnquist were in the position to dismantle as many civil rights as Alito is. They were arch-conservatives, and of course Thomas has proved to be nothing more than the insipid lackey for the right that we all knew him to be, but they were not the demonic threat that Alito is.

We are now, as a party, resigned to hitting the bully on the wrist and then running away and hiding behind the tree.

It's kind of like the whole "keeping your powder dry" thing that I'm guessing you 're pretty fond of.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hamlette]

56. yeah, well, sorry

I didn't like the shot about me posting the link

I lived it too.

I don't think the Dems of today are any worse than in the past.

I think the GOP does the march in lock step better than we do.

I think taking extreme positions back fires. One of the greatest sorrows in our history is FDRs attempt at court packing. He didn't get any good legislation passed after that. He went too far and gave the GOP traction when they said he was going too far. We might have had universal health coverage...the goal he wanted the most. We might have had civil rights then. But nothing. He bacame a lame duck then. Tragedy.

And I think LBJ was a racist, insecure war monger. And Clinton was just barely a Democrat. And I love them both.

[lastliberalintexas]

34. Actually we didn't have to filibuster Scalia and Thomas

We supposedly controlled the Senate then and should have voted against their confirmation in a party line vote. But apparently only the repubs have the party discipline to stick together.

Dems of the past might have been more hawkish than many here would like of them today, but it was the Cold War, and a little context to their hawkishness is necessary. But regardless, all except perhaps the Dixiecrats still remained true to economic and social justice issues. Things you only hear "radicals" and "hippie kooks" talk about today.

[John Q. Citizen]

50. There is no party discipline. If you vote against the wishes of the

party, what's the penelty? Bad commitee assignments? That's the way it is in the American two party system.

Or was, until DeLay. They illegally scammed money to be able to afford to reward their friends and to punish their enemies. That meant recruiting and financing primary opponents to run against incumbants within the party who didn't toe the line.

Even that has broken down to a large extent.


So it's not easy, I guess is what I'm saying, to enforce party cohesion under our system.

[mmonk]

18. Maybe you should remind your "moderate" dems

of civil rights, social security, Medicare, Medicaid, pro choice, fair taxation, education, etc., not us who tell the truth that it doesn't matter if you don't defend those things and ESPECIALLY constitutional checks and balances, guarantees of liberty, and the Bill of Rights. It doesn't matter ONE DAMN BIT if the democratic party brought about these things if they then piss it all away by not standing up for these principles.

[OneBlueSky]

20. by continually approving BushCo budgets and not opposing . . .

the war in Iraq, Democrats are helping to ensure that the ultimate Republican goal of eliminating Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid will become a reality -- when the government is so broke that it can simply no longer afford them . . . and that day is coming sooner rather than later . . .

on edit: it's already happening with Medicare . . . this Part D drug coverage is a windfall for the pharmaceutical and insurance industries that will not help most "consumers" (we used to call them patients) . . . it's cost will, however, hasten the demise of the entire program . . .

[stickdog]

31. It must be tough to be DLC.

For some reason, I keep picturing a bunch of dicks without any balls.

[cmd]

33. Not as tough as those who

have balls, but have cut off their dicks for spite.

[Walt Starr]

45. Then there are those with dicks AND balls who

decide to simply stop fucking around.

[MisterP]

51. can you give examples?

[lastliberalintexas]

32. Lightly dismissing the legitimate concerns of many

isn't going to help things, either on DU or in the real world. Are some people probably behaving rather melodramatically? Yes, because their emotions are high. Alito isn't really a single vote, since he is a lifetime appointment to the High Court. Alito can help reshape the US in the image for which the Corporatists have been working since the New Deal was struck.

This isn't just about abortion, or even just about contraception, or even just about an unchecked autocratic executive brach, or even just about the protection of the Bill of Rights, or even just about protection of the one person one vote ideal, or even just about the right to privacy, or even just about rollbacks of worker protections, or even just about the domination of the legal fallacy known as Corporate Personhood.

It's about ALL of them- rolled into one nice and tidy little vote that should be the easiest decision concerning a filibuster that any Dem has ever had to make. For that matter, it should be just as easy for the supposed moderate republicans in the Senate as well.

Should Roberts have been given a pass? Not in my opinion, since he's just as far right in his judicial philosophy. Might he pull a Warren? Maybe, but highly doubtful. The right wing has learned from that mistake, and have made darn sure not to repeat it. Will Alito be the deciding vote? Probably not. It still leaves the Court likely split 5-4 on most issues, but it does give the right the edge on some of *their* most important points. And it also puts them one step closer to control of the High Court for the next generation.

I wouldn't worry so much about the people threatening to leave the party if such and such doesn't happen. There won't be a party to leave if the Dems keep acting as they have been.

[Dr Fate]

40. Strategy: Ridicule concerned DEMS, make excuses for coward DEMs.

Got it?

It's a real winner.

[AntiCoup2K4]

52. Yeah, but don't try posting a thread about THAT

:eyes:

[Guaranteed]

62. It's an old time favorite.

Best post of the day, Doc.

[LoZoccolo]

37. WINNER!

:thumbsup:

[Dr Fate]

38. Or, DEMs could fillibuster and rally the base like never before.

Or- we could continue to make desperate excuses for DEMs who are afraid of Bush/media and ridicule those who are opposed to giving Bush what he wants.

[radio4progressives]

42. White Supremacist - Patriarch and Misogynist

Anybody ALLOWING Alito on the SCOTUS is a ReichBot Boot Lickin' Sycophant Infiltrator and Liberal Traitor .

[sendero]

43. I've got a better idea..

.... I hired a team of bodyguards.

Now, I've been mugged, spit on, pepper sprayed and robbed time and time again. I'm getting kind of tired of it. When I look at my team, and ask them to do something - they gaze at their shoes and shrug their shoulders.

Yes, I enjoy getting pissed on time and time again. I think I'll cut them another check.

[LittleClarkie]

47. Oh yeah, OH YEAH

Well, I've been a member for TEN WHOLE MONTHS! So there.

[samhsarah]

53. isn't this taking away from some of the valid arguments many people have?

[Dr Fate]

54. Now you get it! Much easier than fighting Bush...

It's easier to be-little concerned DEMs than to stick your neck out with a real fight against Bush.

[samhsarah]

55. i never said that. and i also don't advocate for giving up on the

democratic party. i think we have to support whoever is the democrat up for election. but people have valid arguments and complaints with certain dems. they should be critical. that is what separates us from bobble head freepers. dems need to know they will be held to a higher standard than that and if they don't look out for the best interests of the people who put them in office, they will face a fight in the primaries.

[Dr Fate]

59. I agree with you- I was not attempting to put words in your mouth. n/t

n/t

[Mr_Spock]

57. It would be better is some of the "ultimatum bomb tossers" would stop

being so damned selfish and think of the rest of us huh? :lol:

[populistdriven]

58. shut-it-down!!!

[samhsarah]

60. here's a thread you may be interested in....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2365675

:headbang:

[Guaranteed]

61. Haven't we seen this post before?

I think we've seen it every time something important comes up for the past five years, just before the Democrats back down.

You know- I'm getting kinda of sick of this post. It's- STARTING- to look like some kind of bullshit excuse for cowardice.