Is it "we" or is it "them?"

[Mythsaje]

I'm not sure where this all leaves us--the motivated political addict here on DU. "We," the netroot Democrats, are ripping it up with one another. But, frankly, as a Party, we haven't controlled things in so long that we don't know if anything we're saying means anything to anyone but ourselves.

I'm pretty positive minded. I want to believe we made a difference and that we can continue to make a difference. I like to think they'll listen to us, if we're smart, articulate, and make sense.

This is a bigger sea change than we realize, perhaps. We've been on the opposition for so long--almost as long as the internet has existed--that we have no idea how this will all affect the business in Washington when OUR Senators and Reps take the floor.

Maybe we should have a forum, or at least a database, of contact numbers and/or e-mails for these people. I looked for one here on DU but couldn't find it. Is there one? If so, where is it?

[bobbie]

1. Just speaking for myself, the one party with two faces is "them"

And will be "them" (the Janus party?) until our political system allows election of independent third party candidates (and ideally has no electoral college). The one party we have now has two branches the fascists and the enablers. And it will allow only superficial change, and..."truthiness."

I don't share your view of what the US gov't really is. I think the last election was great, but doesn't change the fundemental truth that the US gov't has little to do with "us." Unless you're a wealthy corporation.

Ergo, "them."

[orpupilofnature57]

2. Communication ,We make less Thems than They do , just remind them

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/04/09/03_hard.html

[Horse with no Name]

3. The way that I see it is

After hearing today a couple comments made by some of our newest elected Democrats
(Jim Webb: Wouldn't walk across the street to see Jane Fonda slit her wrists)
(Claire McGaskill: Believes the President gets some choices (On Bolton) )
We added a couple of anti-choice candidates with D's behind their names to the House...
and then John Conyers taking impeachment off the table. Never mind that I always understood investigations need to come first, but taking it off the table is pretty final. Seems like perhaps a deal has been struck somewhere.
Rahm Emanual making noises that he wants to see the far left faction of the party purged or at least silenced.
Anyway, not so sure that those of us on the far left actually got a victory this time around. On paper, sure, it's a win. In real life, not so sure.
Depends on how accountable we decide to make them.
If our side is just going to go in and make nice and go forward--letting bygones be bygones, then I'll chalk that up as a loss.

[Mythsaje]

4. Letting bygones be bygones, in the long run,

is a recipe for disaster. I truly hope they're not that stupid, corrupt, cowardly, or blind.

[orpupilofnature57]

5. Impeachment is on the table no matter what a few Dem's say...

and i am confident Democrats can be persuaded to change their mind's using reason instead of ego.