Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:11 PM Nov 2014

So Elizabeth Warren's getting a title to match the reality

that she's a leader among FDR Democrats. Less than two years after becoming a Senator! This is what happens to proud Liberals who know when to use their fists.

It wouldn't surprise me if she gets another title in 2016.

I understand that some Democrats hate her because she used to be a Republican, years before entering public service. Or maybe they're just yammering about it in a strange attempt to boost some Third Way presidential contender. In either case, those Democrats should think about meditation, or learning anger management techniques, because she's now a full-throated Democrat, she's tough, she's passionate, and she ain't going away.

And if she has her way, and we all help her out, the American Dream won't go away either. It will turn around and come back to us.

This is a great start; let's do what we can to turn it into a great finish.

Regards,

Very-Happy Manny

73 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
So Elizabeth Warren's getting a title to match the reality (Original Post) MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 OP
Yeah-then the DSCC fredamae Nov 2014 #1
Whatever you think about Tester pscot Nov 2014 #17
Looks like she's being used as a tool for the establishment... NiceTryGuy Nov 2014 #2
Possibly true, but it hardly matters MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #7
I don't think you understand how being pulled into the establishment works... NiceTryGuy Nov 2014 #8
I think I do, but MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #10
Agree Mnpaul Nov 2014 #51
I worry about Warren. I like her tremendously and have followed her for many years Wella Nov 2014 #53
Really? sheshe2 Nov 2014 #59
You're pretty naive, aren't you. Wella Nov 2014 #61
Not sure what your reply has to do with what was said. nt mattclearing Nov 2014 #62
I don't think you have read her book: A Fighting Chance. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #55
I suspect less than admirable intentions too, but EW seems... polichick Nov 2014 #18
And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar pscot Nov 2014 #19
You sure don't give our first woman sheshe2 Nov 2014 #21
She's not a queen... NiceTryGuy Nov 2014 #49
This message was self-deleted by its author sheshe2 Nov 2014 #56
Sheshe2, I listen to a lot of what you say F4lconF16 Nov 2014 #64
Have you read her book A Fighting Chance. I suspect not. It will probably put your mind to rest. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #57
I agree....a tool by the establishment TheNutcracker Nov 2014 #26
How can any Democrat hate her? I don't! hrmjustin Nov 2014 #3
the attempt to pretend democrats are divided continues arely staircase Nov 2014 #9
Yes, it certainly does. NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #31
Paid disruptors, no doubt. MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #34
I've never bought into ... NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #36
Why do you think Senate leadership appointed MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #38
Of course we're not all on the same page. NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #41
When was the last time you recall MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #42
... NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #46
Actually, that's exactly what it is MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #47
You are implying ... NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #52
Are you claiming that "emissary" and "liaison" have MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #68
Yes, Manny, they are different roles. NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #69
"I'm not the one complaining about centrists, red state Dems, blue dogs, Third Wayers, ..." Scuba Nov 2014 #65
That's right, I sure am not. NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #70
Nordstrom's says they're better off without some customers. Similarly, the Democratic Party ... Scuba Nov 2014 #71
Well, good luck ... NanceGreggs Nov 2014 #73
Nah, they're not in the party. joshcryer Nov 2014 #63
I don't know what real world you live in, but the VOTERS are the real world, and in my real world, sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #44
They don't Andy823 Nov 2014 #11
That's mean. MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #13
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Nov 2014 #4
I've been getting some pretty strong gut feelings for a few Cleita Nov 2014 #5
She's in the top 5 of most important figures in the Democratic Party. Ykcutnek Nov 2014 #6
And she is being trashed on this thread,Ykcutnek. sheshe2 Nov 2014 #60
well somebody has to serve the tea and cookies eh? nt msongs Nov 2014 #12
It's Interesting How Many Are Uncomfortable With FDR Democrats... WillyT Nov 2014 #14
And to you, WillyT! MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #15
^^^THIS^^^ L0oniX Nov 2014 #32
Exactly right, Willy. I am an FDR Democrat and I think we are going to see that from more and more sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #45
Agreed that we should help out. Baitball Blogger Nov 2014 #16
Manny, my fear is that some other parallel universe gets to have President Warren tclambert Nov 2014 #20
Think of how people felt in 1932. MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #22
Actually I think the voters thought this out very intelligently this time. They sent the message 'we sabrina 1 Nov 2014 #48
This old deaniac madokie Nov 2014 #23
I hope you're right, Manny, and that this position turns out to be substantive . . . markpkessinger Nov 2014 #24
Remember, Reid appointed her to the banking committee MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #25
And he created this opportunity for her, too. But way too many DUers call Reid a fogey who MADem Nov 2014 #27
I've learned to like Reid MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #28
Well, you're an exception to the rule in this venue. MADem Nov 2014 #29
Good point . . . markpkessinger Nov 2014 #30
It's beginning to sound like Reid said "awww, $&@^ it" MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #33
My thoughts on Harry Oilwellian Nov 2014 #35
Agreed. MannyGoldstein Nov 2014 #37
Huh...I haven't seen that story before Oilwellian Nov 2014 #40
good points G_j Nov 2014 #39
It's comforting to think Oilwellian Nov 2014 #43
If you read her book, you will learn that Harry Reid has picked Elizabeth Warren for an important JDPriestly Nov 2014 #58
Got some people freaking out. Rex Nov 2014 #50
K&R. JDPriestly Nov 2014 #54
K & R davidpdx Nov 2014 #66
Remus dislikes when one uses the third person in referencing one's self. nt Tommy_Carcetti Nov 2014 #67
Post removed Post removed Nov 2014 #72

fredamae

(4,458 posts)
1. Yeah-then the DSCC
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:18 PM
Nov 2014

puts Jon Tester in charge? Don't get me wrong-I like him....I'm certain he's perfect for MT. That said, I don't believe he represents the entire left leaning rest of us.
The DSCC learned, imo...absolutely Nothing.

pscot

(21,023 posts)
17. Whatever you think about Tester
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 08:42 PM
Nov 2014

He's no Wall Street shill. He also speaks Cowboy, a language known to damned few Beltway smart alecks

 

NiceTryGuy

(53 posts)
2. Looks like she's being used as a tool for the establishment...
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:20 PM
Nov 2014

I don't know. It looks to me like she's being used as a tool to keep the current establishment in power. This seems like a way for the establishment to get its claws into her, and marching to their drum. It would be one thing if this happened before people started asking questions about the strength of Democratic leadership, but this looks like a move to save Harry Reid's neck as minority leader, while keeping Warren in line.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
7. Possibly true, but it hardly matters
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:54 PM
Nov 2014

She'll rise above any nonsense they try to pull, and they'd only give her the title if it was consistant with the reality.

 

NiceTryGuy

(53 posts)
8. I don't think you understand how being pulled into the establishment works...
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:58 PM
Nov 2014

The establishment is where you become a so-called "realist."

 

Wella

(1,827 posts)
53. I worry about Warren. I like her tremendously and have followed her for many years
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 02:26 AM
Nov 2014

back when she was a college professor making speeches about the shrinking middle class wealth--way before 2008. I worry that they will co-opt her or destroy her.

sheshe2

(83,319 posts)
59. Really?
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 04:24 AM
Nov 2014
I worry that they will co-opt her or destroy her.


Do women not have a brain in their head anymore? WTF! We can't think for ourselves! Holy shit~

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
55. I don't think you have read her book: A Fighting Chance.
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 02:42 AM
Nov 2014

She discusses how the establishment works at length when she describes going to dinner with Larry Summers. Get the book and read that part if nothing else.

Elizabeth Warren is smarter than the rest of them. Even more important she is more honest than the rest of them. She will be fine.

She is an excellent debater. She is realistic. She is realistic about what it is to be a poor kid growing up in a state like Oklahoma, going to what I would call community college and ending up teaching the very rich and the very intelligent at Harvard Law School. Can't get more relaistic than that. Great preparation for dealing with the establishment.

polichick

(37,152 posts)
18. I suspect less than admirable intentions too, but EW seems...
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 08:44 PM
Nov 2014

strong enough not to let them use her. Maybe she'll use her new spot for her own agenda.

sheshe2

(83,319 posts)
21. You sure don't give our first woman
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 09:28 PM
Nov 2014

Senator from Mass much credit for brains. She is not being used and she is no tool. She has taken on the big boys before, both the banks and the GOP and they fear her. The GOP underestimated her when they stalled her nomination for CFPB, they thought they got rid of her. Well she came back to bite them as our Senior Senator from Mass. She is stronger than ever.

Elizabeth Warren is an intelligent, strong, fearless and dynamic woman. Trust me, do not underestimate that woman ever. You do her a grave disservice with your post.

 

NiceTryGuy

(53 posts)
49. She's not a queen...
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 02:13 AM
Nov 2014

I'm not worried about doing her a "grave disservice." I'm worried that she's taken the establishment bait, and is now on the leash. I'm looking at this situation with cold, hard political calculation, not my emotions over something she said before that I agreed with.

Response to NiceTryGuy (Reply #49)

F4lconF16

(3,747 posts)
64. Sheshe2, I listen to a lot of what you say
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 05:45 AM
Nov 2014

About women. You have made some pretty fantastic and inspirational posts, and I will continue to listen. But I think you're completely off base here. No one is trashing Warren because she is a woman--they're sincerely worried that she may be affected by big money, just as many others have been.

"To summarize. Women are stupid, easily lead, cause they have no functioning brain. She is following the establishment blindly on a leash, like a dog. Like a B***h"

If I've ever seen an example of putting words in someone's mouth, this is it. I'm sorry, but I think you're flat out wrong. This isn't a misinterpretation, this is an attack. I've heard the same words said about men on the establishment leash many times. If anything, I've seen posters constantly praise Senator Warren for her intelligence. Though sexist comments are made (and they have been, and I and others have objected), it really feels like you're looking for something here.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
57. Have you read her book A Fighting Chance. I suspect not. It will probably put your mind to rest.
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 02:45 AM
Nov 2014

Unlike most members of Congress, Elizabeth Warren knows why she is there and what she wants to accomplish there.

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
3. How can any Democrat hate her? I don't!
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:23 PM
Nov 2014

I wish they were all like her.

I support Hillary but you won't here me say a bad word about Warren.

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
9. the attempt to pretend democrats are divided continues
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:58 PM
Nov 2014

I see. One of the things about taking a break from here is the powerful realization that many of the arguments here don't exist in the real world of real Democratic grassroots workers.

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
31. Yes, it certainly does.
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 10:59 PM
Nov 2014

And those promoting the "Dems are divided" BS are almost invariably the same people.

You know, it's almost as though they WANT to see divisiveness within the party ...

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
34. Paid disruptors, no doubt.
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 11:09 PM
Nov 2014

Or Glenn-Greenwald Libertarians.

I mean... Of course there's no disagreements, 'cos who could grumble about this best of all possible parties?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1265&pid=1641

Maybe you could write something incisive yet lofty about it?

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
36. I've never bought into ...
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:15 AM
Nov 2014

... the "paid disruptors" thingy. There are plenty of disruptors here who are more than happy to do the job for free.

And there is a difference between disagreements among Democrats (always have been, always will be) and promoting the idea that the party is "divided" on some grand scale.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
38. Why do you think Senate leadership appointed
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:18 AM
Nov 2014

an emissary to Liberals? Because everyone's on the same page?

Is Harry Reid a disruptor?

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
41. Of course we're not all on the same page.
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:32 AM
Nov 2014

Big Tent - herding cats - I'm not a member of an organized party, I'm a Democrat, etc.

I'm not the one complaining about centrists, red state Dems, blue dogs, Third Wayers, DINOs, Conservadems, yadda yadda. There are posters here who have been promoting the idea that to be a "real Dem", or a "real liberal", or a "real progressive", one has to march in lockstep with self-proclaimed "real" members of the party.

I call bullshit on that noise.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
42. When was the last time you recall
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:37 AM
Nov 2014

an official emissary being appointed to a group within the Democratic Party?

I cannot remember such a thing, ever - but I look forward to your references otherwise.

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
46. ...
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:50 AM
Nov 2014
"Warren will also serve as a liaison to liberal organizations," according to The Huffington Post.

Being a liaison to liberal organizations is not the same thing as being an "official emissary" to a "group within the party".

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
52. You are implying ...
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 02:25 AM
Nov 2014

... that Warren's new role is that of an "emissary" (an "official" emissary, no less) whose goal will be to reach out to "liberals" within the party.

The announcement of her new role clearly specifies that she will be acting as a liaison between the the Democratic Policy and Communications Center and liberal organizations - which makes perfect sense, as the Policy and Communications Centre concerns itself with messaging and policy, and the input of liberal organizations would be of great assistance in shaping that messaging and policy.

I know that you (and others here) want to see this as some sort of reaching out to "liberals" who you believe to all be disgruntled Democrats who are never, ever listened to or acknowledged. Thus your insistence that Warren is an "official emissary" whose mission is to listen to your complaints and attempt to pour oil on troubled waters.


 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
68. Are you claiming that "emissary" and "liaison" have
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 08:40 AM
Nov 2014

significantly different meanings, which they don't?

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=emissary

Or are you claiming that "Liberals" and "Liberal organizations" are somehow vastly different things?

And again, when has anything like this happened in the history of the Senate?

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
69. Yes, Manny, they are different roles.
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 06:46 PM
Nov 2014

Liaison: a person who helps organizations or groups to work together and provide information to each other

Emissary: a person who is sent on a mission to represent another person or organization

(Merriam-Webster dictionary)

And yes, "liberals" and "liberal organizations" are different things. "Liberals" are individuals who share certain ideals and principles. "Liberal Organizations" are just that - organizations - composed of individuals who have formally banded together, usually with specific goals in mind.

For example, there is a difference between liaising with individual kids who play baseball and liaising with Little League International.

There are also organizations that are seen as “liberal organizations” in that they share common principles/goals with liberal Democrats – i.e. environmental protection groups, organizations devoted to fair voting practices – who are not affiliated with any political party.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
65. "I'm not the one complaining about centrists, red state Dems, blue dogs, Third Wayers, ..."
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 07:38 AM
Nov 2014
I'm not the one complaining about centrists, red state Dems, blue dogs, Third Wayers, DINOs, Conservadems, yadda yadda.



Nope, you're sure not!

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
70. That's right, I sure am not.
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 07:38 PM
Nov 2014

Democrats are Democrats. They come in all shapes and sizes, from all different backgrounds, from different parts of the country. Some are more conservative than others; some are more liberal than others. Some are conservative on some issues, but liberal on others.

Over the past few years here on DU, there are those who have continually fomented the idea that some Democrats are worthy, and others aren't. Much discussion about who needs to be shunned, or be rid of completely.

Now, it would seem obvious that promoting the idea that Democrats should distance themselves from each other, and break off into their little "groups" to fight with fellow party members, serves the purposes of one party only - and that party is NOT the Democratic Party.

The self-labelling that has emerged is nothing less than laughable. "I'm am FDR Dem," "I'm a Wellstone Dem," "I'm a JFK with overtones of LBJ, a smattering of Ted Kennedy, and a soupcon of Jimmy Carter Dem."

What next? Secret handshakes? Decoder rings? Coloured bandanas folded in certain configurations so that you can all recognize each other on the street?

This kind of divisiveness is not only detrimental to Democrats as a whole, it childish in the extreme. And the fact that so many DUers are willing to fall into lockstep behind this kind of bullshit speaks for itself.





 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
71. Nordstrom's says they're better off without some customers. Similarly, the Democratic Party ...
Sat Nov 15, 2014, 09:47 AM
Nov 2014

... would be far better off without the neocons who have infiltrated it over the last 35 years.

NanceGreggs

(27,813 posts)
73. Well, good luck ...
Sat Nov 15, 2014, 07:26 PM
Nov 2014

... ridding the Party of everyone you don't like, or have deemed to be not Democratic enough.

With the keyboard warriors on DU at your back, I'm sure you'll be wildly successful.



BTW, the Nordstrom's analogy is utterly laughable!

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
63. Nah, they're not in the party.
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 04:52 AM
Nov 2014

They have no sway in the party. They just mouth off as the adults in the room do what needs to be done. This latest appointment is a case in point, but it is questionable whether it will work, because the so called liberals are having such a fit over it.

The adults in the Democratic Party are trying what they can. I think they are too obsessed with some radical element that has no relevance because it has shown at least two times in a row now that it can't GOTV and doesn't give a shit (and in fact will bemoan the party itself when the activist left fails, it's all so cute).

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
44. I don't know what real world you live in, but the VOTERS are the real world, and in my real world,
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:46 AM
Nov 2014

Dems, especially young Dems, have reached the point where they no longer are willing to just go along with the march to the Right of their party, and are working hard to rebuild the party from the bottom up, locally, so THEY rather than the Third Way are the ones who influence their party, as it should be.

Just met with some very young Dems today and they are amazing. So much more informed about what their future will be if they simply allow their party to take their votes for granted.

It's an exciting time, it's good to have seen the whole picture which many of us did not for a long time. Because once you do, you know what needs to be done.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
13. That's mean.
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 07:50 PM
Nov 2014

And incorrect.

www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5248278
http://metamorphosis.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5123636 (as usual cali_democrat deleted his post when it later proved inconvenient, but you'll get the drift)

etc.

I await your apology.

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
5. I've been getting some pretty strong gut feelings for a few
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:35 PM
Nov 2014

months now that she's going to the front of the line in 2016.

 

Ykcutnek

(1,305 posts)
6. She's in the top 5 of most important figures in the Democratic Party.
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 06:36 PM
Nov 2014

Whether she has an arbitrary title to go with it or not.

sheshe2

(83,319 posts)
60. And she is being trashed on this thread,Ykcutnek.
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 04:33 AM
Nov 2014

She is on a leash now....a brainless woman! I am so over this place.

 

WillyT

(72,631 posts)
14. It's Interesting How Many Are Uncomfortable With FDR Democrats...
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 07:57 PM
Nov 2014

We held the Congress for 40 years after FDR... because he, and they, DID SOMETHING for ordinary working folk.



K & R, Happy Manny !!!



 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
15. And to you, WillyT!
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 08:03 PM
Nov 2014


Thanks for spreading the good news about Sen. Warren's new title!

The Third Way will soon Go Away!

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
45. Exactly right, Willy. I am an FDR Democrat and I think we are going to see that from more and more
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:49 AM
Nov 2014

Democrats from now on. The current situation isn't helping the working class and they know it.

Proud FDR Dem here who has noticed a strange attempt to denigrate one of the party's best presidents, right here on a Dem forum.

Baitball Blogger

(46,570 posts)
16. Agreed that we should help out.
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 08:06 PM
Nov 2014

I'm counting on all the savvy DUers to let me know which organizations are valid enough for us to support.

tclambert

(11,080 posts)
20. Manny, my fear is that some other parallel universe gets to have President Warren
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 09:17 PM
Nov 2014

and this universe settles for nonsensical election results . . . again. I'm really starting to hate that other universe. They get all the good stuff, and this universe gets crap. I mean, progressive proposals passed by massive margins in states that voted for Republican politicians. It's like voters in this universe get hit by some sort of force field that deactivates the logic centers of their brains as they prepare to vote.

Come to think of it, I believe the machine that does this is called a television, and the force driving it is called dark money.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
22. Think of how people felt in 1932.
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 09:31 PM
Nov 2014

We're back in the 1930s again. Do we get FDR, or Hitler?

It's our job as FDR Democrats to see that we get the former. I think we can do this.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
48. Actually I think the voters thought this out very intelligently this time. They sent the message 'we
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:55 AM
Nov 2014

want Progressive issues' as they voted for Ballot Issues, but 'we no longer believe our elected officials support what we want'.

We'll see what those officials do with the message they were sent by the voters.

We know now from the voters that we are being lied to when we are told, to excuse Dems in DC going along with Right Wing policies, that we have to 'move to the Center', because 'This is a Conservative country'.

I thank the voters for putting that lie to rest once and for all. I don't think you are giving them enough credit. That was an important message.

markpkessinger

(8,381 posts)
24. I hope you're right, Manny, and that this position turns out to be substantive . . .
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 10:12 PM
Nov 2014

. . . My fear, though, is that with Harry Reid having been re-elected as majority leader, this is simply a move to mollify the progressive wing of the party. I sincerely hope that fear turns out to be unfounded.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
25. Remember, Reid appointed her to the banking committee
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 10:19 PM
Nov 2014

Which many didn't want. I think he really likes her.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
27. And he created this opportunity for her, too. But way too many DUers call Reid a fogey who
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 10:25 PM
Nov 2014

"needs to go."

I think there are a lot of people here who like to stir up shit, and create divisions that do not exist.

It gives their lives meaning.


Or something.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
28. I've learned to like Reid
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 10:29 PM
Nov 2014

I think he's one of the very few in Congress whose heart's in the right place.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
29. Well, you're an exception to the rule in this venue.
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 10:31 PM
Nov 2014

I've never seen more crapping on the guy anywhere else, except when I read about the goings-on in the Republican caucus.

Oilwellian

(12,647 posts)
35. My thoughts on Harry
Thu Nov 13, 2014, 11:44 PM
Nov 2014

When Chained CPI was being debated, and every single Democratic leader went on camera in support of a Bill, I decided to do a video on the issue (something I've yet to finish but may revive.) Anyway, when I was gathering the video clips of the entire Democratic leadership voicing their support for cuts to SS, the only Democratic leader I could not find a clip on was Harry Reid. I think he's held up quite a few Republican Bills over the years that the Third Wayers would have gladly voted yes on, if only Harry would play.

I don't know if you saw the thread about McCaskill voicing opposition to Reid remaining minority leader, but it solidified my belief that he has been less than willing to play Third Way games. I hope I'm right. LOL

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
37. Agreed.
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:16 AM
Nov 2014

I think he was raging mad at Obama for that Social Security garbage:

Aides said Reid actually tore up the proposal and threw it into the blazing fire in his ornate green marble fireplace. The paper burned. Reid said he didn’t want evidence that the idea had ever been considered.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-mcconnell-and-biden-pulled-congress-away-from-the-fiscal-cliff/2013/01/02/992fe6de-5501-11e2-8e84-e933f677fe68_print.html

He's also been shutting down the TPP.


Oilwellian

(12,647 posts)
40. Huh...I haven't seen that story before
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:30 AM
Nov 2014

Let's hope there aren't enough Third Way Dem votes in the Senate to help Repubs override an Obama veto, if he actually does that. I have my doubts. We live in frighteningly interesting times.

Oilwellian

(12,647 posts)
43. It's comforting to think
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 01:38 AM
Nov 2014

He will have Warren's back. I hope he teaches her the tricks of the trade, so to speak.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
58. If you read her book, you will learn that Harry Reid has picked Elizabeth Warren for an important
Fri Nov 14, 2014, 02:52 AM
Nov 2014

role previously. It was he who called on her to head the group reviewing the work being done on the bail-outs.

I strongly recommend that people read her book A Fighting Chance.

Response to MannyGoldstein (Original post)

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»So Elizabeth Warren's get...