The apologists are a threat to all of us --- You can only win by demanding more, more, more.

[kpete]

SUN APR 10, 2011 AT 01:46 PM EDT
The apologists are a threat to all of us.
byElement 61

...............

The apologists defend themselves as pragmatists, but they're not. That is a critical mistake, particularly in a world where compromise is necessary. Listen very carefully. You are not being pragmatic. You are not being reasonable. It is not pragmatic to destroy our ability to fight. It is not reasonable to kneecap us at the very beginning of the race. It is not pragmatic to give the entire debate over to the Right.

This has moved beyond a simple fight over politics, policy, or money. Our opponents are in it to take over the very soul of our country, and it is absolutely critical that we see it the same way. If we ever want to get even half of the ideals we dream of, we the progressives must fight for not half, but the whole. We must fight tooth and nail at every step, and we must tell our politicians at every step that it was not enough. One tenth was not enough. Half is not enough. Nine tenths is not enough. Obama has not done enough. The campaign promises were not enough. The Democrats in Congress have not given us enough. You can only win by demanding more, more, more.

Fight for your ideals. Fight for ALL of them. Do not let these concepts of pragmatism, of reasonableness, and of compromise seep in and rot our foundation. It's an infectious disease on our side, a disastrous result of our bent towards intellectualism. It will be our downfall, and I'm not interested in losing because you were too scared to stand up for what you believe in. If you can't do that, leave the battle to those of us who can, so that we can take our country back.

the rest:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/10/965501/-The-apologists-are-a-threat-to-all-of-us

[Skidmore]

1. Or by saying "NO!" just like the teabaggers did.

[AndyTiedye]

37. It's Easy For The Teabaggers, They WANT to Shut Down the Government

They can obstruct obstruct obstruct and hope that it all shuts down.
That would suit their paymasters (the Koch brothers) just fine.

For us to adopt the same tactics would play into their hands,
and well as helping them to shift the blame for the mess to Democrats.

unkicked and unrecommended.

[Skidmore]

58. ???

[treestar]

63. Exactly, it's built into what they want

They want the government to do nothing (except pry into private matters).

[EstimatedProphet]

81. That's why you have to let them do it

They want it so bad, they should have the consequences.

[abelenkpe]

101. You do know

that posting at all is essentially a kick right?

[Daemonaquila]

104. Which is why you can't win.

Of course. It's better to be polite than to ever have a chance of winning. The KochHeads and their friends know full well that the left is full of people who'll cave to anything, for the sake of "reason" and "tactics." That's why they're laughing at the left and taking home victory after victory.

[blackspade]

107. We get blamed anyway.

So your basically saying we lose no matter what, because the abministration and congressional Democrats are playing into the Rethugs right now.

We should be taking the truth to the people. But, that would entail the president and the leaders of the Democratic party to actually take a concrete stand on the issues that benefit the American people.

[AllTooEasy]

97. 9/10ths not enough? I thought the Repukes were spoiled little rich kids...

Sorry, but I'm not rich enough to live in an ideological utopia like Paul Krugman. I have to live in reality. Life under Obama has been 10 times better for me than under any Rethug president.

[highplainsdem]

2. K&R!

[Fearless]

3. Exactly what I've been saying for years and getting booed and hissed at

By the DU peanut gallery.

[kpete]

5. That pragmatism, by the way, is a joke.

That pragmatism, by the way, is a joke. It's a loser attitude, the idea that you should push for what's reasonable instead of what you want. Give up on your ideals, they tell us, they're not realistic with Congress being Republican controlled. Obama is just a man, so overlook the repeated insults and dismissals of who we are and what we stand for.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/04/10/965501/-The-apologists-are-a-threat-to-all-of-us

[Fearless]

14. I do not see what you're getting at.

[kpete]

16. just saying

you were right!
peace, kpete

[Fearless]

18. Yay!

:hi:

[Bluerthanblue]

19. if what 'we' stand for is MY WAY or the highway-

how are we any better than 'them'?

That isn't "progressive". That's hardly inclusive or tolerant.

We will never be able to achieve our goals through brute force- not in any lasting form.

The way you are advocating, might work temporarily, but it guarantees a continual battle with those who feel as immovable and as ruthless on the other side.

[boston bean]

21. No people understand compromise has to happen, but when the compromise is one sided that's the issue

And it tends to get people less likely to compromise in the future.

See losing situation, even for someone who feels like you.

[RaleighNCDUer]

23. As if there was not a continuous battle anyway.

Giving your lunch money to a bully NEVER ends with the bully going away. It leads to MORE demands.

You are mistaken if you see the other side as immovable - they ARE moving toward their goals with every concession we make.

How are we better than them? You are mistaking tactics for ideals. Our ideals make us better than them - their tactics make them more effective than us. This is not a goddam game of football, where one side wins, the other side loses, and everybody goes home and has a beer. People live or die in this game - that's what makes us better than them.

Compromise with the devil, and the devil wins. Vote for the lesser evil, and evil is elected.

[Bluerthanblue]

29. my entire life has been 'us' vs. 'them' - I'm fuckin sick and tired

of it.

People talk about war as being a terrible solution to anything. People talk about insanity as being doing the same thing over and over expecting things to turn out different-

How is what this article suggests any different?

If you don't think people will DIE if the attitude of the person writing this article is followed- you're a fool.

We ALL want the 'ideal'. We all have principals which hold particular significance to me. I've read so many posts that say if ______ doesn't happen then "I'm through". Ok- so then what?

This country isn't just 'us'- like it or not, there are more than a few people who believe differently than we do. And they have a voice too.

Your belief that tactics and ideals aren't BOTH important doesn't jibe with my view of what I believe Democrats are all about. The tactics that the right-wing use may be effective in the short run- but in the long run, they will ultimately be seen for what they are. The party of NO- the party of bullies and character assassination- of selfish, self centered absolutes.

That large number of independent voters who helped elect Pres. Obama is evidence that many who had voted with republicans in the past, were sick of their tactics AND their agenda.

If we adopt the tactics of the right-wing - we are sacrificing an essential part of what makes us, us.

:shrug:

[RaleighNCDUer]

46. But you are drawing a parallel where none exists -

Holding the line against the right is NOT the flip-side of what they are doing. This is not 'they are taking healthcare away from us, so we will take healthcare away from them'.

If you can't see that, there's no point to this conversation.

What the left is doing, is holding to principles no matter who attackes them - even if it is the President we helped elect.

What the right is doing is obstructing the left, with no principles behind them whatsoever - or haven't you noticed them fighting tooth and nail against things which, under a Republican president, they supported.

I'm not saying we SHOULD not compromise - I'm saying we CANNOT compromise. Every attempt at compromise costs us more, and causes them to move the goalposts farther from our own principles. The only way to win that game is to not play.

[Bluerthanblue]

50. "you can only win by demanding more, more, more."

that isn't holding onto principals.

That's the attitude of a three yr. old who has not learned how to live in a social setting yet. That is the mindset of someone who is more interested in 'getting their own way' regardless of the consequences, for others involved- than in considering the situation as a whole.

I agree, the right is intent upon destroying Democratic policies and principals. They are doing just what the article says to do in reverse. They are demanding "more, more, more" even when it involves adopting policies which will ultimately hurt them- as much as it will us.

We cannot adopt the position of refusing all compromise, and DEMANDING more, more, more.

You know, it is entirely possible that the 'right-wing' is encouraging us to attack each other the way this article encourages. It serves their purpose very well. Divide and conquer- distract and destroy.

I have NO problem with people having strong opinions and issues which they feel they cannot budge on. But I DO have a problem with people who seek to use and manipulate others into following their lead- demonizing those who don't won't do what they tell us to, and pitting us against each other.

The article labels those who aren't against Pres. Obama as "apologists". How does that do anything other than alienate us, and divide us?

Should we DEMAND "more, more, more" ??? Not if you ask me. It's a hell of a lot different than saying "we cannot budge when it comes to de-funding Medicaid, or SS or other essential safety nets- of laying out the reasons why what the opposition is trying to do is destructive to ALL Americans. We CAN and should present the reasons WHY our Democratic policies are 'best'- not just expect the Pres. to do it all. We should also continually voice our positions to the reps. who all too often don't even give us 'lip-service'.

We joke about getting Dems to work together as like "herding cats"- and then place the entire fault for our disappointment on Pres. Obama.

I don't believe that there is any electable Democratic candidate who would be able to satisfy the author of the article which this OP is applauding.

That's only my opinion, based on 55yrs of life on this sad old world.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

85. I bet you buy cars at sticker price.

I don't, and I don't expect a Democratic president to either. Yes, it can be time-consuming, frustrating, even uncomfortable, but it's worth it to try and get the best deal. After watching Obama in action for nearly three years it's obvious he is conflict-averse, and that is NOT serving the nation well. And I've yet to hear Captain Bipartisanship articulate why Democratic policies are best; what we've got instead is someone who embraces right-wing policies of economic deregulation, privatization, and globalization (fat cats get fatter and the workers get screwed). It wasn't acceptable under Reagan, Clinton or W; it's not acceptable now. So, yeah, criticism of Obama is legitimate, and the Obama-can-do-no-wrong crowd REALLY needs to open their eyes.

[socialist_n_TN]

56. There is so much here...........

What do you suggest doing when the "war" that you're so sick of is being WAGED ON US? Because you're sick of war do you just roll over and die? People WILL die if the RW/capitalist agenda is enacted anyway. In fact, the REASON these progressive policies were enacted in the first place is BECAUSE people were dying.

True the country isn't just made up of us. There is a capitalist/exploiting class (very small) and there are their apologists (somewhat larger). But our side is larger, yet you seem to think that we're the ones who should roll over. Look at that post downthread where Rachel Maddow shows the percentages of those who believe like WE do. A LARGE majority. Yet WE should roll over?

And WHY do you think that that those unconcerned middle voters will get tired of the RW bullying machine if no one gives them a serious alternative? Since the group that you're pinning such hope on doesn't even pay attention except for maybe 2 or 3 weeks every four years, the RW noise machine has them propagandized by the time they start looking at things closer. WE have to be the ones to give them the alternative EVERY DAY IN EVERY INTERACTION.

Start the negotiations with a hard core position that's the CORRECT position for the country. And then if necessary compromise from there. Don't START with the compromise position and then compromise FURTHER away from it.

[laundry_queen]

75. +1000 nt

[bluethruandthru]

94. Great post! n/t

[Enthusiast]

48. But caving on every issue works?

Sorry. I disagree completely.

[Bluerthanblue]

51. no caving on every issue doesn't work-

it isn't what has happened either.

I can't pretend that there aren't things that have happened that frustrate and disappoint me, but I also understand that if the Republicans had their way, it would be a HELL of alot worse.

Pres. Obama isn't god, king, or despot. I realize that there are some who would want this, but I'm not one of them.

We underestimate the damage that was done by the 2000 'election', the 'yer with us or against us' mentality, and the self-righteous self centered attitude that 8 yrs of Bush/Cheney has wrought.

[roguevalley]

57. I don't give a shit. NO to cuts to the social network and if we have

to get our hands dirty doing it then GOOD. Read up on our party. We are the bruised knuckle party. Not the pissy ass whiny ass can't we all get along and how much of my ass do you want to chop off with that ax and are you sure its enough party that we are now.

I don't care. Kick them in the balls. Kick them, kick them, kick them. This damned country is WAITING for us to do that. If we are too damned dainty and pure and full of shit to do that then we DESERVE what is happening to us.

[tomp]

78. when their way is ruining the country, yeah....

....my way or the highway.

we are better than them because our ideas actually serve the interests of the vast majority of americans and not the tiny minority of the rich.

this ONGOING "compromise" between the two wings of the national party has driven us over the brink of disaster....or hadn't you noticed?

continual battle? not if we politically wipe them out with massive ongoing demonstration until we get what we want, i.e., what is good for the vast majority of americans. not if we wipe out the undue influence of money in politics. that is progressive and reasonable by any standard. brute force (non-violent, except in self-defense) is the ONLY way to achieve our goals.

so my advice: get out of the way or get run over.

[EstimatedProphet]

82. How do you be tolerant of intolerant people?

How do you include people on your side that want your side to die?

Here's a big clue as to why we are not them:

Our side wants to expand common goods to all Americans. Their side wants to take them away. By that alone, we are better than them.

[abelenkpe]

103. Maintaining democracy has always been a continual battle. nt

[Daemonaquila]

105. Yes. We are.

Right ideas are right ideas. Politics isn't about who's got the nicest personality. When a rabid grizzly is on your tail, you don't negotiate. You'd better be just as ruthless, and be glad of it.

[fascisthunter]

109. That's Ok... That's why we are Supposed to have a Democracy

things are to be decided at the ballot box. Those who feel that strong about an issue, have to accept the consequences of an election. There is nothing wrong with being unflinching about something you know is right. Saying we shouldn't presupposes that we can't resolve the issue without there being some ill forgotten consequence.

When you are legitimately in the majority, you have a mandate to fulfill what the voters expected from you. You do it, not compromise and pathetically hope you will get a pat on the head from your opponent, that's ridiculous, and an equation for losing. I'm a liberal, and mainly a pacifist, but hell if I'm gonna be Mr. Fucking Rogers.

[EFerrari]

26. Exactly.

As if work, health care or holding criminals accountable to the law are some ethereal dream and not the basic requirements of a democratic society.

[rufus dog]

some see it as compromise and fairness

The right look at it as a war, there is no compromise and the only thing that matters in winning to them.

I was called out (by who I suspect to be a plant) as stooping to Beck standards on Thursday night for the following: Do not give the Nickolaus "honest mistake" claim any support.

[Fearless]

13. So we are going to appease the GOP? Hardly.

If we give something they'll want more.

[rufus dog]

45. If you give a mouse a cookie!

Everything a Republican claims a Dem will do is pure projection, death panels, Obama is going to cut your medicare, it is class warfare....

The only winnable strategy is to fight back harder, some might call it the Chicago Way!

The dems proposal should include:

Raising taxes to the Clinton era, cutting defense spending to the Clinton era. Remember the pukes claim that if we roll back to the 2006 puke budget life would be good. Bull fucking shit, use it against them, change it to "let's roll it back to 1992 levels for taxes and Defense spending then make the fight about 24 million jobs created to ZERO. (Yes Bush did have a bit of a net gain if you stop the day he left office, but not the mess he left behind. Make them own it and 24 to zero sounds a lot better)

Propose eliminating religious exemptions for everything but charity, all admin, housing, etc relief gets eliminated.

Cut all corporate loop holes, increase funding in alternative energies to 1/2 the level of the Chinese, ramping up to 100% in ten years.

Put single payer back on the table, they want to have the fight again, have the fight.

Without being aggressive the Dems will lose every time, you can either go the slow death route or take the fight to them.

[bobbolink]

27. You will get cheers from me, not boos and hisses!

Especially when it comes to continuallyy "compromising" on the safety net... what little is left.

[boston bean]

4. I agree.

It is the apologists who are threatening our values. Not those fighting for them.

[abelenkpe]

96. +1 nt

[leftstreet]

6. You gotta give the GOP credit. They're willing to fight for their shitty policies

They don't give in to "pragmatism" or "reasonableness."

Every Republican with half a brain cell knows it'd be more cost effective to fund single payer healthcare than throw billions at the military. But they know their wealthy owners won't "compromise" - so they don't either.

:-(

K&R

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ruggerson]

8. This has been self evident during many of the LGBT rights discussions

Obama had to be pushed and pushed to make good on his promises and those who fought against the LGBT activists and others who were doing the pushing and tried to portray them as "anti Obama" did a grave disservice to the cause in general and to their LGBT brothers and sisters individually.

[Fearless]

11. Indeed.

[Zorra]

32. The "mature, sensible liberals" know, of course, that change must come slowly.

Why, allowing GLBT folks their equal Constitutional rights requires a great deal of forethought and planning, and we must, of course, (sensible liberal dude, in his flannel po-jamas and robe, takes small break to put more tobacco in the pipe, light it, and remove fuzzy slippers before going on...) do this over a period of many years, and always consider the fragile sensibilities of the conservative republican fundamentalist religious voter.
:sarcasm:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. "Moderation in prinicple is always a vice." Thomas Paine

"A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice.
Thomas Paine

[Bluerthanblue]

10. "take our country back"

is this what our children have to look forward to?

A life time of them vs. us? As a person whose first recollection of a President was JFK, who lived through the divisive Vietnam/Nixon/Carter/Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush/ yrs. I really want better for all of us.

I'm so sick of this joke that we call the "United" states.

There is so little about us that is united. Extremes on both sides of this country will be the destruction of us all.

A house divided against itself cannot stand.

Winning isn't always getting your own way. I'm sick to death of it always being us against them.

This article is just garbage imo- for what little that is worth. It's more of the same just with a "progressive" spin. (kind of an oxymoron)

[RaleighNCDUer]

24. Right. So let's not push back and let the extremists on only ONE side

have a voice.

We can learn to be 'good Germans'.

[Bluerthanblue]

31. oh bullshit- this isn't about

not pushing back- Did you read the article?

This is about NO COMPROMISE. This is about being immovable.

This isn't about having legitimate differences of opinion or policy issues and voicing them clearly and effectively. This is about looking for someone to dump all our frustrations and anger on.

[MuseRider]

35. Their job is to take what we tell them we want

and work it out the best they can. It is their job to do some compromising. We all know it but it is not our job at all. Our job is to hold their feet to the fire and not let up. Maybe, just maybe the job would then be hard enough that they would actually work at it rather than going along to keep things nice and tidy. Maybe they would not want to be there for umpteen terms because we the people want better for all of us and we make their job HARD. It is not our job to make things easy for them. God lord, no wonder nothing changes. If I hear one more "poor President Obama, look at all he has to deal with" I think I will puke. I mean come on. It is his hard job, he wanted it and we are letting him get by with letting the destroyers of our society win every single time.

If your boss let you put your feet up and talk to your girlfriend (or whatever) on the phone 15 minutes of every hour and then was not unhappy or not pressuring you to do more work would you do it? Maybe at first if you have a great work ethic you would not talk and you would work but not for long. He needs to know he can be fired easily. Primary challenger or not, the "who else you gonna vote for" or not or simply people giving up and not caring as much because their elected officials don't seem to care, he needs to feel the fire in our hearts and the hurt in our lives from all the things he is compromising away without a single knock down, drag out fight. He needs to want the job bad enough to do it no matter how much against his nature it is. This is supposed to be messy not a country club luncheon. It feels like (I think it is exactly) that they do not care. They have us where they want us, feeling sorry for them having to do the job, fat and lazy, becoming more uneducated because they have allowed that to happen and clueless what to do about it.

NO compromise from us means they have to listen and do their best, work hard or they lose their jobs. Now they don't seem to know that anymore because we don't want to do the work of pushing them. We are immovable, they have to wiggle, we have to push hard.

[RaleighNCDUer]

49. So, a pack of dingoes demand to eat all your babies -

the appropriate response is to compromise and offer them only half your babies.

As I said elsewhere, it is not a matter of 'we should not compromise' but, on core principles, we CANNOT compromise.

[Bluenorthwest]

34. You quote Lincoln and then claim he should have compromised

How would you have united that divided house without taking an actual stand against the great evil of slavery? By allowing a decreasing head count of new slaves each year or what? What other sorts of winning could the Union had done, other than getting OUR way on human chattel slavery?
Sounds to me like you just want to roll over and let them have it all, as a way of being 'united'.
Reading your posts makes me agree with the OP so strongly.

[Bluerthanblue]

41. are you familiar with Pres. Lincoln's support of the "Corwin Amendment"?

Pres. Lincoln supported it-

No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.<1>


I encourage you to read this explanation of what it's impact was, and Pres. Lincoln's involvement in it's passage.

You might understand this a bit better if you do.

...."In his inaugural address, Lincoln noted Congressional approval of the Corwin amendment and stated that he "had no objection to its being made express and irrevocable." This was not a departure from Lincoln's views on slavery at that time. Lincoln followed the Republican platform from the Chicago convention. He believed that the major problem between the North and South was the inability to reach agreement with respect to the expansion of slavery. Lincoln did not believe that he had the power to eliminate slavery where it already existed. However, Southerners feared that a Republican administration would take direct aim at the institution of slavery. By tacitly supporting Corwin's amendment, Lincoln hoped to convince the South that he would not move to abolish slavery and, at the minimum, keep the border states of Maryland, Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky, and North Carolina from seceding.

Lincoln's March 16, 1861 letters to the governors did not endorse or oppose the proposed thirteenth amendment. They merely transmitted a copy of the joint resolution to amend the constitution. This was the first step to ratification by the states. After the firing on Fort Sumter and Lincoln's call for troops, important border states Virginia and Tennessee, among others, seceded. The Civil War began and the purpose of the Corwin amendment was greatly reduced. However, Ohio and Maryland ratified it, and the 1862 Illinois Constitutional Convention endorsed it.

The discovery of Lincoln's letter to the governor of Florida does not alter the historical perspective that Lincoln was willing to compromise to restore the Union before hostilities began. It also underscores Lincoln's evolution toward emancipation. This snapshot of March 1861 shows Lincoln's last attempt to restore the Union while maintaining his party's platform. While personally opposed to slavery, Lincoln believed the Constitution supported it. His support of the Corwin amendment attempted to codify that belief, but the Civil War changed his opinion on presidential power. Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in 1862, and in 1865, vigorously worked to pass the actual thirteenth amendment, which declared slavery illegal."


http://www.lib.niu.edu/2006/ih060934.html

[Zorra]

12. "Fight for your ideals. Fight for ALL of them."

Don't be afraid.

“Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" Ben Franklin

Good post. knr

[upi402]

15. "reasonable" "adult" = STFU

and take what we're giving... either party.

[bullwinkle428]

17. I'd rather be a "left-bagger" than hand the tea-baggers everything they demand.

K&R.

[sabrina 1]

20. Good post and excellent advice.

When did anyone ever get anything in politics without a huge fight?

We needed a fighter at this time in our history and got a compromiser.

[msongs]

22. watch Mr. O "compromise" when he gives his big speech this week. nt

[Raksha]

25. K & R - FINALLY...a progressive call to arms...music to my ears!!!

Re "This has moved beyond a simple fight over politics, policy, or money. Our opponents are in it to take over the very soul of our country, and it is absolutely critical that we see it the same way. If we ever want to get even half of the ideals we dream of, we the progressives must fight for not half, but the whole. We must fight tooth and nail at every step, and we must tell our politicians at every step that it was not enough. One tenth was not enough. Half is not enough. Nine tenths is not enough. Obama has not done enough. The campaign promises were not enough. The Democrats in Congress have not given us enough. You can only win by demanding more, more, more."

[Lorien]

28. I'm not interested in losing because you were too scared to stand up for what you believe in.

If you can't do that, leave the battle to those of us who can, so that we can take our country back." Amen! The "pragmatists" need to either join in the fight or get out of the way!

[bvar22]

30. Who will FIGHT for us?

Who will STAND UP and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
Lofty Rhetoric, Empty Promises, and Whiny Excuses are meaningless now.

"By their WORKS you will know them,"
And by their WORKS they will be held accountable.

[Modern_Matthew]

33. I believe in complaining even if you get everything you want...

After all, there could always be something you overlooked.

[alcibiades_mystery]

36. Are the "apologists" like "vermin"???

:wow:

[JoePhilly]

38. Kill the apologists!!!!!

:sarcasm:

[phleshdef]

39. This attitude is childish, divisive, counter-productive, emotionally driven, extreme and irrational.

[boston bean]

40. Which attitude are you talking about.

If it's the attitude of following the Democratic Party around like a puppy dog, instead of helping lead the way (by fighting and criticizing when needed), I'll agree with you.

[Union Scribe]

68. awesome, you found thesaurus.com

Now you wanna explain any of that?

[phleshdef]

84. You fail badly. Those words are not synonyms.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

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

[cyberpj]

86. Ahhh... just exactly what gets the tea-baggers everything they want. nt

[fascisthunter]

92. you should read your own posts sometime

[Ramulux]

42. I think this person..

is a secret republican trying to fracture the democratic party, that is the only logical conclusion I can reach about anyone criticizing Obama and the democrats.

[Bluerthanblue]

54. I'm not sure

if you were being sarcastic or not, but there is credibility to what you are saying.

I don't have a problem with 'criticism'- of Pres. Obama, or any Democrat. the author of the article isn't doing that. The author is doing his best to pit us against each other, rather than uniting us against the Republican agenda.

[xchrom]

43. Recommend

[brandywine]

44. Exactly right. They work for us.

The squeaky wheel gets the oil.

[Enthusiast]

47. K&R

If we say nothing the nation will become fully fascist. Maybe some here would prefer fascism.

[Keith Bee]

52. K&R

I loved Andrea True!

[socialist_n_TN]

53. Don't see a damn thing wrong with this article........

It says what I and a LOT of others have said for a while. Yes compromise is a part of negotiation, but you don't START negotiations with a "reasonable" compromise position. You start the negotiations with a HARD CORE idealistic position and move from there.

There's a HUGE amount of anger out in the country today on both sides. The difference is in the DEPTH of that anger. The teabaggers are angry, but their anger is an inch deep BECAUSE IT'S BASED ON DEMONSTRABLE LIES. THEY can't even defend their anger. Our anger is righteous and deep. It's also been slow building and it's not artificially paid for by the rich capitalists. Whose anger will be the most sustainable?

[motorcityliberal]

55. A whole bunch of bullshit

If these people were so concerned about the soul of the country where in the bloody hell were they at back in November? All the firebag wing of the Democratic Party have done since the last election is pass the buck. You guys aided the great psycho takeover of 2010 and you want to lecture people like me about what I SHOULD do. Really? Whomever wrote that piece can save that shit for someone who cares.

I wish the author tell me what social advancement happens overnight? There is no real progressive movement there are two camps of people one people who actually knows what the fuck is going on and trying to improve things and the other camp are people who at the first moment of resistance run home and blame others for their screw ups.

[Blue_In_AK]

59. "You guys"? Really??

I haven't missed an election -- ANY election -- for as long as I can remember, and I feel fairly certain that most of the "non" apologists here at DU turned out for the 2010 election and voted. Perhaps if the party had actually STOOD for something, a little more enthusiasm could have been generated and we wouldn't be complaining so much now. You can't blame the Democratic wing of the Democratic party for this administration's lackluster performance over the past two years.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[treestar]

64. And make demands!

While threatening to go away! No proof that works whatsoever.

The only "fire" they have is for judging others as not having done enough for them! Very unreasonable people.

[Union Scribe]

69. The apologists' mushy centrism gave Michigan Snyder.

And its love of compromise is going to give him his budget. Enjoy that.

[JoeyT]

61. I don't have any problem with actual pragmatism or reasonableness.

It's just that the new definition of "pragmatism" seems to be selling out people that aren't powerful enough to do you any harm to promote the good of people that can help you the most. Reasonableness seems to have become an end in itself rather than a means to an end.

Being "reasonable" seems to be the only thing we're allowed to believe in or promote anymore.

[treestar]

62. No, you just annoy people

who have to deal with the realities.

I see people every day who demand more and more and more and more. If you're dealing with someone for whom nothing is ever enough, you get sick of them and "fighting" for them is the last thing you want to do.

If you want people to "fight" for you, then constantly telling them what they did is not good enough is not going to motivate them to do anything but eventually tell you to go to hell.

[RaleighNCDUer]

71. The people demanding more and more and more

are the republicans, if you haven't noticed, and the ONLY way to deal with them is to stop saying OK, OK, OK to them. When will the pragmatists learn you CANNOT reason with them, you CANNOT negotiate with them, and you CANNOT compromise with them because every compromise with them is a victory for them, whereupon they take another stap back and again demand more and more and more.

Do you REALLY think that saying "your surrendering to them is fine with me" is going to get them to fight? If they don't know, and don't acklowledge they are on the wrong track how the fuck do you get them on the right track other than by telling them?

If you say "hold my feet to the fire" you got no cause to complain if you get some heat.

[Edweird]

65. Bingo. The 'pragmatists' are HELPING THE GOP DESTROY THE COUNTRY. They are the problem.

One way or another it has to end.

[democracy1st]

66. K & R

[crickets]

67. K&R

[somone]

70. Recommended

[Shiver]

72. Yes! Let's attack our own! Grab your guns everyone, the circular firing squad is about to begin!

I would rather someone fight for what they can get and use that as a toehold to leap for the next goal. Fighting tooth and nail for everything all at once is a great way to get nothing in the end. Grab success where you can and then build on it.

Demanding more and fighting is all well and good, but what are you gonna do when it fails? You're left with people who consider you someone who will never be satisfied, and are not interested in dealing with or listening to you. Prove me wrong - when has demanding everything at once ever worked, and not backfired in the end?

[slay]

73. When you NEGOTIATE you start with everything you want - so you can compromise - Obama starts low

and goes lower. He's the worst negotiator ever IMO. Health care - HA! Tax cuts for BILLIONAIRES?!?!? really?

So yes, you start with everything so you have something to give up later - duh! :eyes:

[Shiver]

74. Oh, I agree.

You START with everything, knowing you will have to give some up. The OP is stating that you should never give anything up, and that anything less than 100 percent of what you want is failure and should be ridiculed.

And he;s not the WORST negotiator ever. I went to college with a guy who haggled UP and thought he was getting the better deal.

[tomp]

80. obama, is that you?

compromise with the rich =fail, lose, die.

it won't fail if we don't give up. we put tens of millions of people in the street for as long as it takes. that strategy CAN'T lose.

compromising with the rich is a GUARANTEED lose.

[Shiver]

83. I don't recall ever saying give up.

Taking what you can get when you can get it and regrouping for the next assault is not giving up.

[tomp]

87. as usual, your type misses the point.

if you don't think democratic "compromise" with republicans has been proved to be a losing strategy you're just not paying attention.

[MisterP]

76. the red-baiters, or the dumb-as-table-leg Moonies who think the Don't Touch My Junk guy

is a Koch stooge, and people pushing Kochie policies can't possibly be Kochies?

[MisterP]

106. more DLC syllogisms:

% refusing to vote until an adequate Dem or Prog comes along is bad, because it'll give us 2, 4, 6 years of GOP policies before they can be reversed by a good Dem
% but decades of GOP policies are okay because we keep voting for bad Dems--even if the end result is far worse than option 1 would've been

% Dems should be supported because they'll fight terrible GOP policies
% but if they agree with those terrible policies, support them anyway

% Nader is bad because he stole the 2000 election
% therefore Jeb, Katherine Harris, and the Felonius Five are pure as driven snow in regards to 2000
% but we can still use them as boogeymen to get you back in line

% pointing out Kochie policies makes you a Kochie
% but enacting Kochie policies isn't
% and if someone proposed Kochie policies before negotiation even began, they're obviously just doing the best you can with the hand they were dealt
% thus they should be exempt from criticism

[defendandprotect]

77. We can see that the rw doesn't push at all for the change they want -- !!! Yikes!

but the fear-based thinking here at DU is often based on PLEASE, SETTLE FOR LESS!!!

CAUSE WE'RE FRIGHTENED -- !!!


The Rightwing Koch Bros. Funded the DLC --

http://www.democrats.com/node/7789

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414

[emilyg]

88. Cheers for this OP

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

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

[democrank]

90. I know one thing for certain...

When some of these same policies and people were offered in the Bush administration, not many Democrats here were cheering. What the hell changed? You hate policy X under Bush but suddenly love it under President Obama? It`s almost unbelievable. If George Bush`s head was announcing Obama`s policies, I`d be willing to bet some of the same people here that are busy nodding and clapping would be having a very different reaction.

Sacrificing principles to "win" isn`t winning.

[fascisthunter]

91. I Have Been Repeating this for a While Now

especially to those telling us what to think and say regarding Obama...

[DeSwiss]

93. Exactly. - K&R n/t

[goobergoober01]

95. AND PART OF THE FIGHT...vote democrat in 2012, EVEN WHEN IT HURTS

[emulatorloo]

98. TAKE BACK THE HOUSE in 2012 and GET A BULLET PROOF MAJORITY IN THE SENATE

Stop blaming democrats on DU.

[emulatorloo]

99. P.S. Unrec for attacking Democrats at DU with your 'apologist' BS

Yes I know it is not your article.

[Modern_Matthew]

100. Apologists seem to forget when they advocate for slow, incremental change...

We don't have the luxury of time. Life is short and without the changes we want and the attacks from all sides for what we've already achieved, it's even shorter. So either step up or move out of the way.

[andym]

102. The key to success is strong ideology backed by pragmatism

that's how Reagan managed to set the course for the destruction of progressivism. He set the political debate, but pragmatically only got about 60% of what he wanted (maybe less) legislatively. But it didn't matter, he has controlled the debate since then (even though he is dead). The Tea party is well on their way to destroying the New Deal/Great Society and installing small government, and our Democratic leaders appear powerless to stop them, because they are not framing the debate ideologically. They need to ASAP.

For example, in 2009 it would have helped immensely to portray the banks as the bad guys, to not rehire Bernanke and instead make noise that the banks would pay for their at best irresponsible behavior. But the words did not flow, even though some modest reforms were put in place. The words (and symbolism) were at least as important.

[felix_numinous]

108. The strategy on the right has been to label what was once middle America extremist--

so to what extent people have bought into the 'progressives as extremist' meme, have totally helped the RW out in their mission. Standing up for human rights is not extremist, we want to conserve our inalienable Constitutional rights.

Any healthy relationship, any healthy person has CLEAR PERSONAL BOUNDARIES. This means calling out abusive behavior, hate racist speech, lying, robbing, getting away with murder and destruction of ecosystems as a breach of OUR PERSONAL SPACE. People put out of their homes = personal space issue! People ripped off of their savings, benefits, and endangered by hate speech = PERSONAL SPACE ISSUE.

We are IN an EXTREME situation, but we are not the extremists!

Us standing our ground is FAR to the left of where the country is right now because THEY are so far to the RIGHT. I think most people get this abstractly, but not in practical terms.

Calling those who have been reduced to survival level of existence whiners is another RW meme.

WE have to fight for our rights all over again, and many people simply wish to avoid or delay this necessary confrontation. But like any abusive relationship--CONFRONTATION is necessary. My 2cents.

[MedleyMisty]

110. You don't negotiate with terrorists

These are not nice reasonable people. They are insane, they are psychopathic, and they are killing the planet and the human species. You simply do not compromise with that. You don't say "Well, only kill half of us and the rest of us will be your willing slaves, and pretty please leave us enough clean water and air and land that we can do some subsistence farming so we can have enough strength to work 14 hours a day seven days a week for you."

No. You go out into the streets and you depose the sons of bitches.