Political caving-in and other stuff since 2000 that has angered me the most. . [View All]

[madfloridian]

No, I am not simply being negative. I am looking ahead by looking back. They say that is how you keep history from repeating itself. I have made no secret of the fact that I think Democrats need to bravely stand up and say who they are. Was it Truman who said that “those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

I read a blog post today that really impressed me with its passion. This Jack and Jill blogger made 4 good points about what Democrats need to change.

Defining electability and discussing who's left out.

Good post. Here is just a portion. Point #1 is my favorite.

They always ran on the principles being touted by the conservative wing of the Democratic Party - better known as Democratic Leadership Council Democrats, and Blue Dog Democrats - a group of Democrats who are only Democrats because they couldn’t get elected from their respective districts if they were registered Republicans.

Anywhoo, these Democrats, always touted the following strategies:

1. Find a “safe” candidate that was “electable”. To me, an “electable” candidate was code word for “not liberal or progressive; doesn’t support civil rights and get gay people the hell away from them” Also meant they would support sending Mexicans back across that border as long as that support wouldn’t cost them in the election.

2. Campaign only in coastal states and urban areas - because it’s a waste of time to contend in rural areas. This means that the areas where Obama won or made it close, were areas not historically contended for before this year’s election. Brotha in Montana? GTHOH with that one.

3. The African-American vote is a reliable base. This, unfortunately, is true, because the Democrats promote themselves as the “Big Tent” party; but the bigotry occasionally comes out the closet; you can tell by looking at which Democrats cross party lines on legislation designed to screw over their own constituency.

4. Engage in circular firing squads to neutralize any Democratic candidate too liberal or progressive, and is a threat to shake up our comfortable establishment.

The gist of her post was about someone left out of the picture. I agree with every word, but I don't post that stuff anymore. I even edited my journal and took out references. It was not worth the ridicule from conservative Dems on forums. Yeh, I caved.

That caution, that conservative thought, that way of keeping the next election in mind instead of speaking out for honesty and truth got us into the tragedy that is Iraq.

They were afraid to speak out, failed to research the situation, and gave Bush his invasion. We were huge on activism about the war, but it made no difference.

WASHINGTON—Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle asked for floor time this week for the Senate to debate President Bush's policy on Iraq. When the time came Friday, only two Democrats showed up.

It was, after all, an exercise in futility. No legislation about war, no resolution on Iraq was at stake.

The nation may be divided over whether to take military action against Saddam Hussein without the backing of the United Nations. In Congress, however, the time for action is long past, leaving the opposition to vent in hallway declamations and in the occasional floor speech to an empty House or Senate chamber.

"This chamber is for the most part ominously, dreadfully silent," Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W-Va., an opponent of war without U.N. support, said recently.

Getting it wrong on the FISA bill may keep our party from holding Bush's administration accountable. Harry Reid had a choice in the Senate. He could have presented a bill that had NO immunity for the telecoms. Instead he deliberately chose to present the one WITH immunity.

Even though the Senate Judiciary Committee passed legislation that provides greater protections for privacy and doesn’t give amnesty to telecommunications companies, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has decided to move the bad Senate Intelligence Committee bill. This is not good news for those of us who respect freedom, the rule of law and the Constitution.

..."Instead of capitulating to the White House, senators should be listening to you. Recent polls show that 61% of American voters believe the government should have to get a warrant from a court before wiretapping the overseas conversations of U.S. citizens. And 59% of American voters reject amnesty for phone companies that may have violated the law.

Sadly, Senator Reid is asking senators to decide where they stand on spying after a secret meeting taking place today with Attorney General Mukasey and Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, a day before voting is scheduled to take place. Director McConnell played a central role in negotiations around the Protect America Act and, acting on behalf of the White House, used questionable tactics and misinformation to convince members to eviscerate the Fourth Amendment.

Because this meeting is secret, we obviously don’t know what’s going on behind closed doors. But if history is any guide, this meeting could be used to provide misleading information about the current threats facing America to scare your senators into continuing the Bush Administration’s secret spying free-for-all.

The House bill was no better. Steny Hoyer admittedly went for a bill with immunity to keep the Blue Dogs from jumping ship.

Hoyer said that if House Democratic leaders failed to reach a FISA deal with the White House and GOP leaders, as many as “30 Blue Dogs and another 20 to 30 members” could have signed onto a Republican discharge petition calling for a floor vote on the Senate version of the FISA bill, which was even more anathema to House Democrats than what eventually passed. Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.) confirmed that “there were a lot of Blue Dogs getting anxious” and “a lot” of them would have signed a discharge petition.

“You can take a position and be a purist and sort of sit around yelling at each across the divide and nothing gets done,” Hoyer said. “The American people, they want us to get this done. That’s the whole thing to me.”

The political event that is really hurting people today is the devastating bankruptcy bill passed in 2005 which was totally and completely supported by Democrats.

There is a lack of exemptions for the ill, the disabled, the elderly who might have large bills from ill health....nothing to protect their homes and cars.

It does not exempt debtors whose financial problems were caused by serious medical problems from means testing. It does not provide protection for medical debt homeowners. Homes and cars could be lost under this new plan if you have medical problems.

It does not preserve existing bankruptcy protections for
individuals experiencing economic distress as caregivers to ill or disabled family members.

There is no provision to insure elderly people in financial trouble who seek bankruptcy could keep their homes. Republicans voted down a provision for it, and 3 Democrats from states with big credit card industries joined them.

Recently it was disclosed that Nancy Pelosi said there would not be help for distressed homeowners in the so-called bail out bills.

Pelosi told fellow Democrats during a closed-door meeting that the idea of letting judges rewrite mortgages to help bankrupt homeowners avoid foreclosure won't be a part of the emergency legislation. That provision, pushed by several Democrats, would be a deal-breaker for Republicans whose votes are needed to pass the measure, she said, according to lawmakers at the meeting.

Each time we were asked to be understanding, that it was hard to get anything done. Those excuses should not be used this time around.

I could mention more...like the way the centrist Democrats, Rahm included, attacked George Lakoff and hurt his progressive Rockridge Institute. I could mention the 12 anti-choice Democrats the DCCC ran this year. But that is enough for now.

The talk of "post partisanship" has bothered me a lot. That means virtually a one party country. That is dangerous talk. I think it is our job to be activists when our party doesn't do its job.

Obama needs to hear our voices even when he is in the WH bubble.