Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

White House official: 'Organized labor just flushed $10 million down the toilet'

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:48 AM
Original message
White House official: 'Organized labor just flushed $10 million down the toilet'
Source: Politico

White House official: 'Organized labor just flushed $10 million down the toilet'

A senior White House official just called me with a very pointed message for the administration's sometime allies in organized labor, who invested heavily in beating Blanche Lincoln, Obama's candidate, in Arkansas.

"Organized labor just flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toilet on a pointless exercise," the official said. "If even half that total had been well-targeted and applied in key House races across this country, that could have made a real difference in November."

Lincoln relied heavily both on Obama's endorsement, which she advertised relentlessly on radio and in the mail, and on the backing of former President Bill Clinton, who backed her to the hilt.

Lincoln foe Bill Halter had the unstinting support of the AFL-CIO, SEIU, AFSCME and other major unions. And labor officials Tuesday evening were already working to spin the narrow loss of their candidate, Bill Halter, as a moral victory, but the cost in money and in the goodwill of the White House may be a steep price to pay for a near miss.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0610/White_House...



Sounds like the Obama administration is pissed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. So, its more important that the White House gets
what they want instead of what the people want??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #1
18. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
dencol Donating Member (297 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:40 AM
Response to Reply #18
44. I am really getting tired of this Administration.
I bet this really pissed the administration off because they may be worried about a primary challenge for the next term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #44
124. Its Rahm Farting from his mouth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #124
166. Rahm Flushed the Unions Down the Toilet
He oughten to have not done that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #166
251. Down from 38 percent to 7 percent of the total jobs
I think globalization has already done that. Which jobs do people think are being moved? It isn't the local lawn service, or cashiers at Wal*Mart.

Personally, I'd just as soon a republican win, as to have someone in office that makes democrats look bad.

We are, again, like during Clinton (bit time responsible for this, since he campaigned for the biche Lincoln), we continue to lose labor, and other democratis support, as we see democrats act like corporate lackeys. And with that, we lose the great gains we've won.

It really seems pointless to vote, since there is so little difference. Of course, I'm an unfortunate person who lives in Alabama, where the republican primary is pretty much the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #251
299. The time for unions to have fought the corporatization of the Democratic Party was long ago--
almost too late now --

Same for women's groups --

From what I've seen of Alabama and Siegelman, etal --

and this election in Arkansas, what's going on with our election process is

simply criminal activity.

Unregulated capitalism is merely organized crime --

and the right wing cannot rise anywhere without political violence.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #166
277. Don't let Obama off the hook, Demeter.
Rahm's a piece of excrement, but his master didn't restrain him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #277
284. Please don't insult excrement
By comparing it to that sleezy little Weasel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orbitalman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #284
302. So what is stinkier than excrement? Tell me and I'll agree. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #302
304. The post wasn't directed at you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #302
336. Well
There are grades of crap. Having done some farm work I would say little is as bad as chicken crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jackpine Radical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #336
361. Turkey shit & pig shit are both probably worse.
But chicken shit is pretty bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #336
364. Another brilliant RAHM IDEA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:56 PM
Response to Reply #284
402. My apologies to excrement. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demeter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #277
355. I Am Certain that Obama Is NOBODY'S Master
and that EVERYBODY knows it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amandabeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #355
401. Maybe. Maybe not.
But if there's another master, it's not Rahm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #44
130. I want a primary challenger to Obama for 2012. WHOEVER runs will get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #130
144. I do too
I am so sick and tired of this crap. Every day it's another disappointment with this president and his administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #144
259. And another me to...Dean or Grayson in any order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #259
268. That'd be a nice ticket, actually
ah, dare to dream...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #268
285. Dare!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #259
295. Me too nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #259
316. That would be a dream ticket
Any order works for me.


:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #259
321. I'd be happy with that. Very happy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #144
279. With Eventual Compromise Inevitable
We all need to stop choosing the most centrist democrat. This causes a compromise between a center-right democrat, and a wildly right-wing republican party, which ends up with health care programs that are "hey, let's make everyone buy health care," rather than single payer, or something a bit better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:55 PM
Response to Reply #144
307. Elections are being decided by $$$$$ -- corporatism....
and that's quite a bit of power -- especially with the new SC decision!!

I'm with ya, tho!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #307
330. Yes it is all about money but they are not actually winning in the traditional sense,
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 01:41 PM by ooglymoogly
they are fixing elections and manipulating the outcome. Just like Arkansas (blatant democrat voter suppression) They supported and manipulated a loser to gain a senate seat and it is happening in most of the red states and red pockets of states. I believe this admin is in on the kill of all progressives candidates even if it means a repug win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #330
335. Agree . . . purpose of the DLC is to move the Dem party to the right ...
to the interests of corporations --

It's quite telling that Obama/Clinton/DLC have supported Lincoln despite

liberal/progressive opposition being so clear --

Reminder of Arlen Specter and Liebermann --

they've won 2 of 3 and we have to try even harder!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RZM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #130
290. Highly unlikely on both counts
There will be no credible primary challenger and if there were, they would be thoroughly and completely trounced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #290
309. .... by money and only by money . . . not by the will of the people -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #130
327. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Admiral Loinpresser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #130
371. For 18 years, Gore has been my choice.
Many of us tried to draft Gore for 2008, but we didn't have sufficient numbers, by far. I dismissed all other viable contenders as damaged goods, due to their infamous IWR vote, except BO. As to BO, I argued we shouldn't nominate him because he might not deliver the goods at Copenhagen, thus bringing the collapse of civilization that much closer.

BO sold us out at Copenhagen and I have the bitter cold comfort of having been right. So in retrospect, the Democratic Party, for the first time in perhaps a century, did not produce a presidential contender worth a goddamn!!!!

I'm willing to give the reins to any Democrat, but these c***suckers.

Dean, hell yeah! Or Grayson, or Jerry Brown. I want an "Oz" candidate, somebody with a heart, a brain and courage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sasquuatch55 Donating Member (701 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #44
217. Never mind this Administration, be pissed at the whole Government (organized crime) and the...
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 10:06 AM by sasquuatch55
..political machine,corporate dominated whores,fear, hate ,and division pushed by the limpboughs, blecks, coultergeists,ins-hannitys, etal, and their followers who think they are doing them and this country a great service. They are over paid corporate employees that are only doing the corptocracys bidding. Why are people so blind and gullible? This is what is destroying this country! The ignorance infuriates me. We are are on our own and instead of fighting back, we are fighting with each other while the above rape us and our country!



edited for sp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #217
311. We're both arguing "organized crime" . . . . and there are still people here
who can't see Obama as a corporatist!!!

Unbelievable!!

Same with unions -- organized crime was set up to infiltrate and destroy them --

took quite a while, but they finally accomplished it -- down to 7% now?


What is our foreign police except organized crime?

It's just amazing what people will believe!

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #44
219. I bet she loses
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 10:07 AM by niceypoo
Her senate bid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #219
263. If those who voted against her stay home or write in Halter
she is certainly done. The fixed election was fixed for that very reason....Halter would have won in the final, Lincoln cannot win and that is the game; Especially if the fix is against her in the final, as it will be. That is pretty good cheating at chess for the pug side. Lawlessness in elections is becoming rampant as any kind of democracy is destroyed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #263
313. Agree with your post completely -- and the "write in" may be a good idea....
???


:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:51 PM
Original message
Yeah
A progressive winning there would encourage more primary challenges agaisnt DLC types. It could not be allowed to occur, particularly in a supposedly reddish state. If Lincoln loses they can just blame the progressives for wrecking her campaign with a primary challenge and then, after a republican wins, they can just pull up another corporate democrat crowned by Tim Kaine's DNC for the next election cycle.

I am starting to remember why I voted Green in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #219
267. If she loses to a Repug,
we have Obama and Clinton to thank for this since they wouldn't stand up for the real Democrat, but instead pushed another corporatist DINO on the state. With the choice between a real Repug and someone who just acts like one most of the time, I think they will choose the real deal and Blanche will become a lobbyist for Wall St.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #267
300. I'm done supporting Republicans
that call themselves Democrats. The Democrats I vote for in the future will be actual Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:03 PM
Response to Reply #267
314. +1000%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #314
326. +1000%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #314
334. +1000! What does it profit a party to win an election and lose its soul?
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 01:53 PM by ooglymoogly
It is a pact with the devil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #267
325. And guess what? That is pretty close to what happened in
MA. When will they ever learn. It is becoming clear that the first thing they worry about is, not having a progressive win, not caring whether it is a dino or a pug who finally wins.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peregrine Took Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #44
275. They are so arrogant they think they got to "home plate" by themselves? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #275
288. Very Well Said.
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #44
291. 2012 isn't that far away . . . but we can see that the right wing of the party
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 12:34 PM by defendandprotect
will fight any attempts at real change!!

Any new leadership -- and every day they are more embedded in party --

especially with new SC ruling re corporate $$ --- !!!



Keep in mind there used to actually be real conservation minded Repugs --

and moderate Repugs -- now it's all Limbaugh-land--!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #18
105. I can only contemplate who in the White House is so immodest in victory.
It is really a weak vessel, a person of great personal insecurity that needs to kick a vanquished opponent.
It seems its still about counting political coup for someone.

Obama, himself, is much better than that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost4words Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #105
131. nothing has changed, we are still the good ole usa
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #105
226. He is? Who hired these people and continues to employ them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #226
237. Good questions
The old axiom "you're judged by the company you keep" would seem to apply. He approves of them and their tactics, or they wouldn't be there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #226
294. +1000% ,,, Obama eloped into White House with Rahm/DLC and those
who created this financial fiasco -- from Summers to Bernanke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #226
301. That's the big question.
This is the third term of George W Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
21. That's how it looks, yes. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guruoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:23 AM
Response to Reply #1
58. Looks like "the people" have spoken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:25 AM
Response to Reply #1
59. You mean it wasn't "people" who voted for Lincoln? Interesting.....(nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:27 AM
Response to Reply #59
72. Except for the ones that didn't get to vote because their polling places were shut down n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:05 AM
Response to Reply #72
77. It happens every election cycle. There's always a reason why candidate "x" didn't win.
I'm not doubting your word, but there's always some sinister plot afoot, that caused someone's preferred candidate to lose. Sometimes a loss is just a loss.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #77
127. 1 hour waits , polling places closed , there was promise of early weekend voteing ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleanime Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #77
164. And your OK with that?
If we going to lose, at least let it be honestly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #164
169. I couldn't agree more. But if the primary results are overturned, then what?
Lincoln's folks make the same charges that Halter's folks are now making? Shouldn't you be able to prove fraud, instead of just making allegations? FWIW, I hope there's an investigation. But I'll guarantee you still won't like the results.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleanime Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #169
201. As long as our national discourse...
is just catch-phrases instead of reasoned dialog, I know I not never going to like the results. Any one who willing to win this way, is some one I don't want in a position of authority.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #169
236. The original issue was who voters wanted, not overturning the primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #77
231. There were posts and threads here on closing polling places and cancelling early election and
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 10:35 AM by No Elephants
how those things would disadvantage Halter. This is not the one I recall, but the first one I found.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

And, you can seriously disadvantage a candidate without committing election fraud, especially if you are in power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #231
246. Like I said, it should be investigated, I'm all for it. I still don't think Halter's...
supporters will be pleased. Short of holding another runoff (which the state obviously can't afford), whaddya do? If an investigation uncovers no fraud, his supporters will claim there's a coverup. Halter was played up as some big Lib, and nothing could be further from the truth. I just hope we hold the seat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #246
283. Did you read Replies 250 and 255? The issue was neither actionable fraud nor a new primary.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 12:17 PM by No Elephants
It was simply whether the people (or a majority of them)really wanted Lincoln or Halter. See Replies 58 and 59.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #77
379. Right, like Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kermitt Gribble Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #59
271. Misinformed people. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #59
315. This was another rigged election -- ensuring that votes for Halter wouldn't be cast --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
93. Looks like the people want Lincoln too. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #93
128. Only the ones allowed to vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hughee99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
211. For politicians, this has always been the most important thing.
Given the choice between what the politician wants and what the people want, the politician will almost always assume they know better and the people don't really understand how things work. People look for a candidate with the same views, so that when those candidates act, it will (hopefully) coincide with what the voter wants too. I don't think anyone votes for a candidate because they thing that person is willing to throw aside his personal preferences and listen to what the voters are saying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fishbulb703 Donating Member (492 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #211
362. I like your last point, there's always room for some open-minded perspective. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hughee99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #362
369. And usually when a politician does something
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 03:36 PM by hughee99
that you know they're not really in favor of, but the people want, we call it "pandering" like it's a bad thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elleng Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #1
212. Sounds like rahm is 'teaching them a lesson.'
That kind of 'attutide.' Always think of such talk, vis a vis teachers/parents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #1
235. She cheated plain and simple. I heard precincts were closed
down in her opponents most supportive districts. Who knows, now that we are not really counting votes anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
24601 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #235
347. "She" cheated? And just how does a US Senator do that when
the election is run at the local level & tabulated by the state?

R-Kansas has always had problems, particularly regarding resources.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JerseygirlCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #1
352. And why do they want that?
I don't understand why the only thing that would matter is a "D" - especially if there's the chance of a better "D".

Lincoln screwed the administration happily until the very last minute. Why do they keep going to bat for people like her and Specter?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:52 AM
Response to Original message
2. Classy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #2
26. I'm sick of these ugly people.
Can't they even be good winners?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:52 AM
Response to Original message
3. ahhhh... I love how Rahm and the lot mock those who they will deeply need.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #3
125. Hes a little DLC Corporate servant
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalmike27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #3
260. Perhaps
We should run a labor party candidate, to muck up the works. Blanche is pretty much a republican anyway, so what to lose. That's show Rahm, and Bill C. what's up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
4. "An (unnamed) senior (no position given) ...
...WH official (how 'official'?) just told me ..."

Does this unnamed senior official know Some-People-Are-Saying?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. You think Smith is lying then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Who is Smith?
The OP referred to an unnamed senior official.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. Smith is the reporter. Well, evidently the AFL-CIO is buying into the "lie"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. Hey, I'm on the union workers' side in this fight ...
... or any fight.

That still doesn't answer the question as to who the "senior WH official" is who allegedly made the statement the OP referred to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:58 AM
Response to Reply #15
31. Who the hell else in the White House uses that language?
Sasha?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. I don't know ...
... who uses "that language". That's why I'm asking who actually did.

So far, no takers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:21 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. Because it's not a real question. It's obviously a progressive's best friend
or someone doing a good imitation.

Someone needs to either introduce Rahm to honey as a rhetorical strategy or get him a minder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:30 AM
Response to Reply #38
41. All I asked was ...
... who is the person who allegedly said what.

The OP was premised on someone having said something. I don't think asking who that someone was is asking too much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:47 AM
Response to Reply #41
46. You don't know that this is a pattern? Really?? Seriously? oh my..
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 02:50 AM by flyarm
be assured ..the unions know damn well who said it..

they don't care if you know or not..they know..they damn well know!

eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:54 AM
Response to Reply #46
49. If they "know" ...
... why don't they name him/her?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:59 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. because they won't slide down the same crappy slope..or perhaps they want to discuss it with their
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 03:02 AM by flyarm
board of members first...of how they want to approach the matter..but you know that..don't you????????

Or you should.

Good night.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:10 AM
Response to Reply #51
54. Oh, I get it ...
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 03:12 AM by NanceGreggs
Someone allegedly said something, and certain people "know" who that someone is. But saying so would cause them to slide down "a crappy slope".

Thanks for clearing that all up. From now on I'll just rely on "someone said something, and I won't say who, or why, or where they got their information from", 'cause that would be "tellin'".

Just trust me on this ...

I am reminded of a friend's father-in-law who once said: "I'm not saying this, and I'm not saying that - but mark my words."

Consider your words duly marked - they have imparted absolutely nothing of substance, but I'll mark them just the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #54
121. self delete..can't be bothered with this nonsense. eom
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 07:30 AM by flyarm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #121
132. are you getting dizzy too? My head is spinning, spinning ,spinning
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #132
177. Dizzy? You bet! It's a "dazzling" exercise in diversionary obfuscation.
But to what end?

To discredit the source of course, and thus deny the obvious implications of the statement, which are:

Total contempt for the unions, and for the democratic process in general.

Which fits a certain pattern we all recognize.

Those who have eyes to see, and minds open to logic and reason, that is. :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #177
320. Right . . . .
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 01:24 PM by defendandprotect

but the positive is that it's making clear the position of the poster.

That's what should be kept in mind!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #320
377. I agree. The refusal to state an opinion on the result is very telling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freebrew Donating Member (478 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #54
205. I'm with you Nance,
baseless accusations are reminiscent of the * years. We shouldn't be condoning it.
I'm with the unions too. If they stay home in Nov., Lincoln will lose. So what. It won't change the voting dynamics in the Senate.
We have a R in the seat now for all intent, Halter would have been better, maybe. It was worth a shot.
Lincoln better get down and start placating the left a bit more if she wants her job next year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #205
287. Agreed. x2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #54
264. NanceGreggs!!! Why are you questioning the bona fides of an upstanding
Repuke source such as Ben Smith of Politico???

That's like questioning Drudge.....n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #264
292. Or the AFL-CIO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Admiral Loinpresser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #54
374. Anonymous WH quotes are as common in DC
as lobbyists and have been for at least 40 years. Are you troubled because it once again shows ObamaCo for the asses they are?

Credibility of the reporting source can be a legitimate issue, but not the identity of the "leaker." You evidently weren't even aware of the reporter's name, so I can't take your beef seriously.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #46
318. Agree . . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #15
160. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #15
234. No you ain't.
You're on Obama's side first and foremost... your posts/rants get usually on the front page, and I do like you writing style BTW. So it is not that hard to miss where you stand on things.

Nothing wrong with your position as an Obama supporter, for tastes there are colors after all. But at least be honest about it.


Cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stellar Donating Member (251 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #15
240. And why do they want to be Anonymous?
An anonymous source on a GOP blog... sound like Rahm to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. true true... but Emanuel saying that just sounds so likely. ha! hope you're having a good nite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. It smells EXACTLY like "liberals are retards" Emmanuel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. it's who I thought of immediately. wish Obama would flush him out of the WH...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:25 AM
Response to Reply #14
86. Among others. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #14
322. Sadly . . . "birds of a feather" . . .
but many here refuse to acknowledge what has been going on since day 1 --

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #12
23. +1 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:06 AM
Response to Reply #12
33. Was he sent down to Earth to destroy the Democratic coalition -
or what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:03 AM
Response to Reply #12
76. Why assume Rahm is the only arse in the administration?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #76
262. Rahm, as Chief of Staff, got to hire the other assholes in the administration. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #262
323. Yes ... and according to Rep. John Conyers ... "The only one Obama listens to is Rahm" ....
I'm wondering if it's Rahm who tells Obama that ...

"Oil rigs don't leak anymore" --


or the new infamous one . . . .

"The Gulf will bounce back" --


It's over folks -- at least the pretense --

long over --



:eyes:


Can't wait 'til we get to the nukes -- !!


:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #262
349. Exactly. So, I don't assume this is Rahm.
And Obama hired Rahm and never fired him. And, while Rahm can recommend people, Obama is really the one who has to hire them.
So, I never assume Obama disagrees with Rahm and the assholes Rahm hired. However, Obama may want to distance himsel from these remarks, even if he agrees with them.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. Well, if it sounds "likely" ...
... it must be accepted as indisputable fact.

I'm having an absolutely GREAT night, actually. As they say, Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to lose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:38 AM
Response to Reply #13
20.  So you are celebrating Lincoln's win? Why exactly , since you are so pro-Labor and all?
No one in my pro-Labor family is happy about this at all and since the AFLCIO isn't doubting the WH statement, we take their word for it. The AFLCIO trumps the WH any day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #20
27. Please point out ...
... where I made any reference to Lincoln's win.

Oooh, that's right - I didn't. Didn't even refer to Lincoln at all.

You're not doubting the "WH statement" - even though no one has yet provided any evidence that the statement came from the WH (unless, of course, an "unnamed official at the WH" is as much "fact" as one needs).

Of course I realize that in Bizarro World a query about the source of certain information automatically equals "celebrating Lincoln's win". How could it not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #27
29. I just stated I take the word of the AFLCIO, who no doubt, know who said what.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 01:51 AM by saracat
AFL-CIO to White House: 'Labor isn't an arm of the Democratic Party'

The major labor federation AFL-CIO took sharp objection tonight to a White House official's assessment that they'd "flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toilet" in the "pointless exercise" of supporting the failed bid of Bill Halter to unseat Sen. Blanche Lincoln.

"If that's their take on this, then they severely misread how the electorate feels and how we're running our political program. When we say we're only going to support elected officials who support our issues," said AFL-CIO spokesman Eddie Vale. "When they say we should have targeted our money among some key house races among Blue Dog Democrats that ain't happening."

"Labor isn't an arm of the Democratic Party," Vale said. "It exists to support working families. And that's what we said tonight, and that's what we're gong to keep saying."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:20 AM
Response to Reply #29
37. No, actually what you stated was ...
... that I was "celebrating Lincoln's win".

I asked you to explain where I said that, or where I referred to Lincoln at all.

Apparently I didn't - and even more apparently, you can't back up that assertion - because if you could have, you would have.

But don't let the facts get in your way.

Point out where I was in any way "celebrating Lincoln's win".

That was YOUR accusation - so prove it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #37
48. Don't ya just love the sound of crickets? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:56 AM
Response to Reply #48
50. Yeppurs ...
... and the crickets have been unusually loud tonight - on this thread, and several others.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:20 AM
Response to Reply #50
57. No "crickets" here. But you never answered my question but accused me of making
"assertions"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:42 AM
Response to Reply #57
65. Your post at No. 20 on this thread ...
"So you are celebrating Lincoln's win? Why exactly , since you are so pro-Labor and all?"

I didn't "accuse you" of making assertions - I plainly stated that you made them, and they're right there for all to see.

Again I ask for one scintilla of proof that I was "celebrating Lincoln's win".

Those are YOUR words, not mine.

So back 'em up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:12 AM
Response to Reply #65
70.  My quote, even as you use it is a QUESTION, not an
ASSERTION. There would not be a question mark after an assertion. I assert nothing "So, are you celebrating Lincoln's win?" is a QUESTION. I know you are celebrating Lincolns win, or you are celebrating Lincoln's win would be assertions.
Not only do you still not answer the QUESTION but you refuse to understand it is one. Is that so you don't have to answer? Methinks thou doth make too much of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:23 AM
Response to Reply #70
71. You said - your words, not mine ...
"I asked "If" you were celebrating Lincoln's win."

Where is the word "if" in your original post, saracat?

I don't see it. Do you?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:32 AM
Response to Reply #71
92.  I do not claim to use the word "If". I claim I am asking IF you are celebrating Lincolns win by my
question "Are you celebrating Lincoln's win". You surely must know the difference, but then again, considering some other word issues,perhaps not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:42 AM
Response to Reply #70
73. Methinks you've been backed into a corner ...
... by insisting the word "if" was there in your reply. We can all see, plain as day, that it wasn't.

And your "edit" time is up - too late to change it.

Ain't that a bitch?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #73
85.  "ARE you celebrating Lincoln's win" was the question. I don't need to edit anything
nor did I try. I am not backed into any corner.Guess you don't want to answer the question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:42 AM
Response to Reply #73
109. "Are you celebrating?" is the proper form for a direct question.
"I am asking IF you are celebrating" is a way of describing asking that question.

Your attempt at a semantic dodge here makes no sense.

I have no idea what you think about Lincoln's victory.

But your descent into sniping over an "if" suggests that you seek to change the subject.

Meanwhile, I am pretty sure that you are attempting to discredit the reporter's assertion that he is quoting a WH official.

and you have no reason to doubt it, other than the reporter's citing of an unnamed source, which the WH couls always deny, if anyone thinks of asking.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #73
378. Here, you can grill Gibbs now, who confirms 'somebody here' said that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #378
382.  Lol. Often it seems some keep protecting the WH for things they aren't ashamed of.
Like authorizing drilling and stuff. Insulting Unions is the norm. They don't deny it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:19 AM
Response to Reply #37
56. Accused you? I asked "If" you were celebrating Lincoln's win. That is the fact.
I notice you never denied it, or answered regarding that point. I can't back up an assertion i didn't make. Perhaps you aren't aware a question is not the same as an assertion, even if it is a sarcastic question it is still a question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:36 AM
Response to Reply #56
64. Are you mad at the WH for Halter's loss? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:54 AM
Response to Reply #56
67. Your exact words ...
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 03:55 AM by NanceGreggs
"So you are celebrating Lincoln's win? Why exactly , since you are so pro-Labor and all?"

Can you please point out where "IF" was mentioned?

"That is the fact." Apparently it's not "the fact" - there was no "if" involved.

Word to the wise, saracat: It is an impossibility to say you said something you obviously didn't say when your post is there, for everyone to see, sorely lacking in the word you are now insisting was there all along.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:25 AM
Response to Reply #67
87. "Are you celebrating Lincoln's win" was the question. Are you going to answer?
"If"I knew you were, I wouldn't have needed to ask, or use a question mark. Are you celebrating Lincoln's win is asking "IF" you are celebrating Lincoln's win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:43 AM
Response to Reply #67
110. That is, in fact, a question, and easily answered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spheric Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #67
126. Quibbling over the word "If" has a rather inglorious history. Ask Bubba.
This whole subthread has a rather surreal quality to it.

Questioning the veracity of Ben Smith because he chooses not to reveal his source in the article seems like blowing smoke to me (a smoke screen?). Reporters do that all the time for any number of reasons. Unless, of course, the White House denies it was said. You might have a case then.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #126
241. I take your point, but, for the record, Bubba questioned the definition of "is," not "if."
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 10:48 AM by No Elephants
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:01 AM
Response to Reply #37
114. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:11 AM
Response to Reply #37
116. Nance
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 07:27 AM by AllentownJake
Are you happy that Lincoln won?

I'll ask it. Grudging respect and admiration and all. Just curious on your take.

No hostility, curious on your take on the Arkansas Primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #37
138. You stated you where having a great night, maybe its just a box of wine!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #29
198. I applaud Mr. Vale's statement.
As for the "anonymous source", well, that statement is completely consistent with the way this White House has viewed working people and the left since the election. And probably before but it was easier to chant a mindless slogan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #13
218. What is your intention? Sorry, but my support for Obama is quickly fading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:41 AM
Response to Reply #7
97. here is an interesting question tho
How hard would it be for you to write a similar 'response' that sounded like Emanuel?

Most people know how he tends to speak and act these days so writing an article that sounds like it comes from him shouldn't be to hard, heck, even the chief WH janitor(a senior position) could likely give a response that sounds like it came from him

Addendum: no clue if they have a chief janitor position but point stands :p
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rpannier Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
42. A few things
1. It must obviously have been Emmanuel, because we all know the administration only has one senior official :sarcasm:

2. It has to be true because it's in the press and they never lie :sarcasm:

3. Wait til the guy who reported tells us he heard it from a guy, who heard it from a guy, who heard it from some guy's barber's second cousin's college roommate who is VERY reliable -- no sarcasm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #4
202. Always the same here...that's the first thing that came to mind too NanceGreggs. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msanthrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
269. Nance--I always ask "Qui Bono?" when reading Politico....
Who does this article serve? Who benefits?

Why, the Repuke candidate for the seat.....

So of course, let's see how many DUers can eat their own rather than question a Repuke source....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #4
331. One of these days you'll have a point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Admiral Loinpresser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #4
373. No, but he's married to
Some-Dem-Presidents-aren't-worth-a-shit, a very influential DLC consultant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Tiger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
405. Just what I was thinking.
All this anger over a rumor. I swear, some people just aren't happy unless they're mad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
5. the DLC and Rahm Emmanuel really hate working people, don't they?
What a bunch of Republican loving traitors the DLC are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #5
30. You left out Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:36 AM
Response to Reply #30
106. No Shit (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #5
257. +1000%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
realisticphish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:02 AM
Response to Original message
8. So what are they saying
that now they won't cooperate with labor on anything? That they'll deliberate support anti-labor laws in revenge?

I seriously doubt that. It's childish bullshit to be saying things like that, and I expect better from our officials. Wait, no I don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. AFL-CIO replies:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:47 AM
Response to Reply #11
25. +1000 nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #8
24. They've not been too labor friendly as it is. This will just be the excuse. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
16. This primary was a WORTHLESS WASTE OF MONEY.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 01:30 AM by robcon
Union members' money was thrown down a toilet.

Lincoln's win is a 52-48 bruising battle, and the Democrats are disunited, and may lose the Senate seat.

edit: correct election result

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojorabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. I donated to his campaign`and
I live in Fl. The admin is not just dissing unions. Every vote that obstructed progress that she made affected me too. I am sure I am one of many many just regular progressives who donated to get rid of her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. I think you got taken, if you donated..
Halter is not any different from Lincoln in policies.

Unions, IMO, just wanted to throw weight around... sort of as a warning to other politicians.

The reason why so much money was spent on this primary had NOTHING to do with policy differences, and EVERYTHING to do with unions trying to bully elected officials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:41 AM
Original message
Gee can't have those "union bullies" Much better to have Rahm bullies.
What exactly is it about unions representing the workers and DC pols representing themselves do you not get? Or did you seriosly believe Blanche Lincoln cares about the workers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
157. Right On, saracat
Can't have those "union bullies" - those ordinary working people that these miserable quisling Pols count on for worker-bees and then kick in the face once they're elected "throwing their weight around" now can we? Don't they know their place? They're disposable worker-drones.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
308. Zactly, saracat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:25 AM
Response to Reply #19
39. "Unions trying to bully elected officials"
Hi Rush, I didnt think you would ever post on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevepol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:46 AM
Original message
Why does everybody talk as it the results of this election mean anything?
Who knows who actually won this election? Who knows who wins any election in the US, whether it's somebody with reasonable, humanitarian goals and principles or the usual corrupt corporatists who presently call the shots?

As long as the vote is counted in total secrecty w/o verification, there is absolute no way to know who wins elections in the US anymore.

I suspect that Halter actually won, that is, more people "tried" to vote for him than "tried" to vote for Lincoln, but who knows? The pre-election polling I believe had Halter up, at least from what I saw, in the latest polls and it stands to reason that the challenger would show better than in the polls because his "trend" was up.

I do think if organized labor spent one-tenth the money they spent on Halter publicizing the fact that we don't have a democracy in the US anymore becuase of the voting machines, their effect on democracy would have been and would be greater in the long run.

But IMO if you work toward a worthy goal, no effort is really wasted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stevepol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:46 AM
Response to Reply #19
66. Why does everybody talk as it the results of this election mean anything?
Who knows who actually won this election? Who knows who wins any election in the US, whether it's somebody with reasonable, humanitarian goals and principles or the usual corrupt corporatists who presently call the shots?

As long as the vote is counted in total secrecty w/o verification, there is absolute no way to know who wins elections in the US anymore.

I suspect that Halter actually won, that is, more people "tried" to vote for him than "tried" to vote for Lincoln, but who knows? The pre-election polling I believe had Halter up, at least from what I saw, in the latest polls and it stands to reason that the challenger would show better than in the polls because his "trend" was up.

I do think if organized labor spent one-tenth the money they spent on Halter publicizing the fact that we don't have a democracy in the US anymore becuase of the voting machines, their effect on democracy would have been and would be greater in the long run.

But IMO if you work toward a worthy goal, no effort is really wasted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #19
232. Oh, yeah. It is not like Lincoln basically spit in the eyes of the unions on an almost daily basis
during her tenure as WallMart's senators.

It must be them organized crime loving bully unions!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #17
143. that was why I contributed too. I did contribute to Sestak more, though, and
I don't live in either state. Any DINO in the senate affects me too.

What I find particularly galling is people say Blanche voted for health reform. True, but this was after it was sufficiently weakened that it her vote for it wouldn't offend her paymasters.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #143
286. I'm almost certain she voted against the final version, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
knixphan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #17
306. Me too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:12 AM
Response to Reply #16
82. We should have primary challenges to incumbents, if we don't like how they vote.
So, what do you suggest?

(Disagree about waste.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #16
117. Democracy sucks
We would be better served if we just let party leaders annoint candidates without pesky elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #117
149. Democracy's cool. Plutonomy sucks. So do political machines. Rigged elections, also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #117
204. Like Gillibrand in New York.
Appointed to the job, no primary fight, gets the Democratic slot with no effort of any kind.

I WILL NOT VOTE FOR HER. Had she won a primary, I would accept her as the Democratic candidate and give her my vote in the general. But she didn't bother with that nonsense. Schumer and Obama didn't want to go to all that trouble.

For the first time in my life, I will leave the Senate slot blank. My party disenfranchised me and if I have no vote, I have no vote to give.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #204
247. I wish you would write in the name of someone you admire.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #247
394. Like this?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

It's a cheap attempt to silence a voice you can't answer when YOU try to set the standards for the voice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #16
120. So it's a waste of members' money to support members' issues?
Let me tell you something - there's a lot of members out here who think it's a waste of their money to support Pols who take their $$ contributions and depend on them to make calls and knock doors and then turn around and vote for Corp interests, not theirs.

Members aren't stupid - they look at the $$ and time and work and hours and hours and hours - literally, millions of phone calls, leaflet drops, worksite campaigns, doors - millions! - in '06 and '08 and ask, for what?

You don't win every battle. But one loss does not a war make. It's really sad that we are this point with an Admin we broke our necks to help into office. Many of us are deeply grieved by it. But it was their choice, not ours, to kick us in the teeth.

We'll see where it goes. I have not a lot more faith in AFL-CIO leadership than I do in Obama's at this point, they've gotten a lot too inside the beltway for their own good, but I do know that the most active of our members are as savvy as anyone on this board when it comes to politics, and they love a good fight.

And they don't consider fighting for workers a waste of money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeff47 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #16
123. Only if history started yesterday
Sen. Lincoln was a terrible blue dog, greatly hurting her state and her party. She carries most of the burden of torpedoing the public option. She's also got a long history of pro-labor campaigning, and anti-labor governing.

Then she got a primary challenger. Suddenly she's proposing very harsh regulations in the Wall Street reform bill. She seems to have learned her lesson for the moment. We'll have to see if it 'sticks'.

This primary was extremely effective at terrifying a blue dog into removing her head from her ass. That's not a waste of money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #16
180. It was a worthy fight against a rotten politician.
I am happy to have contributed.

Ya win a few, ya lose a few.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moochy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:06 AM
Response to Reply #16
192. Can't beleive you are actually defending this statement
The Rec's you are getting are not because you support Rahm's loose lips.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:41 AM
Response to Original message
22. Heh. This is good stuff:
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 02:07 AM by chill_wind
(from Willy T's thread

"Whoop...There It Is!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

As Sam Seder tweeted:



and when Blanche loses? MT @benpolitico Sr. WH Official: Labor just flushed 10 mil of its members $ down the toilet in a pointless exercise



And Ezra Klein too:



For a WH that prizes discipline and dislikes drama, some "Senior WH official" is sure shooting off to @marcambinder and @benpolitico




More Ezra:



@benpolitico A few more statements like that one, and bet Labor will launch some more "pointless exercises."




I bet Labor will do it, too. And I'll be extremely supportive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DRoseDARs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:48 AM
Response to Original message
28. Versus the hundreds of BILLIONS flushed down the toilet for Wall Street?
Hey Rahm, fuck you. You and your All-Star team of Super Friends bungled the bailout, bungled Health Care Reform, and are actively working to bungle the Gulf Spill.

Shut. Your. Fucking. Mouth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:30 AM
Response to Reply #28
91. +1
Fuck Rahm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #28
147. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #28
167. Rahm works for and was hired by Obama. The buck stops with Obama, not Rahm. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clixtox Donating Member (941 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #167
206. I doubt that!

I believe they were both "hired" by their corporate masters to do the bidding of the uber-rich whose most trusted stooges are behind the curtain actually pulling the strings.

Rahm is Obomba's Dick Cheney. The actual "manager" of the so-called, "Obama Administration". Obomba no more runs anything, other than his mouth, than shrub did.

Any observer of the meteoric rise of Obomba knew that he was anointed when he was the keynote speaker at the Democratic Party convention in 2004. Obomba would have never been created if he didn't know his role in the whole charade, known as the "American" political system. He has been a blessed stroke of luck for the oligarchs, as is/was Clinton.

After 8 years of shrub, who really wasn't expected to win in 2000 by anyone, and, of course, he didn't, Obomba's deft rhetorical skills, which can, and do, bamboozle the sheeple, are being utilized adroitly.

Have you noticed?

If not, shoot your TV(s) now and read some on-topic books and blogs before it is too late.

Please...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
totodeinhere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #206
244. I hear what you saying. But there is too much confusion at DU about this.
We have threads at DU where people say the same thing you are saying. But then at the same time we have other threads saying that it's good that Obama's poll numbers are so high. But if Obama is a corporate stooge, then why is it good news that his poll numbers are high? Shouldn't that be bad news, not good? Whom to believe? We can't have it both ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clixtox Donating Member (941 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #244
281. Considering any current poll seriously is nuts! They are all corrupt!

You pay the piper, you call the tune!

Any discussion of supposed poll results is a waste of time and brain.

They never mean anything except to mold the opinions of those sheeple who prefer their vote to be for the winning side, since they wouldn't want to "waste their vote" on a loser...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #167
289. Harry Truman would be proud of you! (I know I am.)
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 12:29 PM by No Elephants
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dana_b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #28
274. best post!!
their hypocrisy is stunning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alittlelark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #28
403. +1000 (If the 'unnamed source' is accurate)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:03 AM
Response to Original message
32. You can bet your life the AFL-CIO Knows damn well who in the WH made that statement!
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 02:04 AM by flyarm
bet the farm on it!..They responded quickly and powerfully to this WH asshole who made this comment.

They do not make statements like they just did without knowing who they are addressing.

Just because people here don't know who said it ..doesn't for one city second mean the Unions don't know who said it!

And anyone who has never heard of the "unknown WH Offical " just wants to be in denial!

And do not for a moment think this wasn't cleared by the "Big boss!"

Only a fool would be so blind...or they want to be fooled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:18 AM
Response to Original message
35. am really beginning to loathe this WH
falling so far short of meeting the challenges faced, opting instead for the status quo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #35
161. It's really a shame that someone
like Kucinich is considered 'unelectable' in today's America. Imagine the impact of having a peoples champion in the WH. Oh that we can dream..........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harmonicon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:19 AM
Response to Original message
36. I think this "official" has a basic misunderstanding of the relationship.
Labor will support whoever they want in politics, and should. They do not exist to get Dems elected - Dems get elected because they exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:20 AM
Response to Reply #36
84. Bingo. WH Democrats dumping on liberals and unions is pure political gold.
For Republicans and third Parties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:27 AM
Response to Original message
40. Any Democrat who scorns unions is a fool.
They will win the primary, but they will not have the workers to campaign for them. We will see that this November.

I always get out and walk my precinct during elections. I used to go to Democratic Club meetings. I still vote Democratic, but I don't campaign. And it's a loss because I put GOTV reminders on the doors of Democrats in three (that's 3) precincts in November 2004. I traveled clear across the country to work for Obama. He has lost my work. He is such a disappointment I am so sorry to say.

This tears my heart, but Obama is going the wrong direction.

Working people have no party. There are two corporate parties, no party for working people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:30 AM
Response to Reply #40
61. Precisely
They may get my vote in November, but absolutely nothing beyond that.

It is also very possible I will need to work on a scrap book or clean out my tool box that day and just could be too busy to go to the polls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burnsei sensei Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #40
197. +1
with pride and joy in the wisdom of your post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #40
248. On the bright side,
alienating labor may be a good way to jump start a progessive party and leave the Democrats to the DLC crowd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:34 PM
Response to Reply #40
329. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedRoses323 Donating Member (175 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #40
341. Dam right!!!
:thumbsup: :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:39 AM
Response to Original message
43. Emily's List bailed on Lincoln as well..read it here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Thank you to the DU'er who posted this..

I got a letter from Emily's list with a survey over a month ago..I ripped them a new one if they were to support Lincoln..I guess I wasn't the only one to respond so strongly against Lincoln...and other Dem's who have sold the working person out!

I told Emily's list...in no uncertain terms...not another dime from me..and to cancel my membership.. if they supported candidates and incumbents like this.

Thank you Emily's list..you listened..as are the Unions ..finally!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:26 AM
Response to Reply #43
88. Great. EL has been indiscriminate in the past, includong dumping a fortune on Coakkley in the Mass.
primary. (She was the only female in the primary.) We sometimes have bigger fish to fry, though.

Thanks, Malcolm!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
45. Funny how the article doesn't say that...
...the loss of money and goodwill of the unions might be a steep price to pay for a DINO.


Spin, spin, spin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:53 AM
Response to Original message
47. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
burnsei sensei Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:20 AM
Original message
+1
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aslanspal Donating Member (303 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:01 AM
Response to Original message
52. Really Ugly thing to say..now it is on Blanche to reach out in the next 24 hours
She will need Bill Halter and all his orginization to beat Boozmann...if she does not ..she is doomed

She must push back as a Progressive.

I do not know if Politico is playing us or someone in the White House really said it and were that ugly..if it is the White House then shame on them.

Labor really does work hard and goes door to door and makes those calls and mostly to the poor and lower middle class..they really are for the underdog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:08 AM
Response to Original message
53. Rahm can go fuck himself. What good will did unions have to lose?
Obama screwed us on health care, EFCA, and K-12 teachers.

If the left doesn't dig in our heels, we'll continue to only have a choice between corporate and corporater in elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sketchartist Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:10 AM
Response to Original message
55. Ooooh, I'm so SCARED...
The Obama administration is pissed? At me, for supporting Bill Halter?

Oh NO! What are they gonna do, sick BP's Tony Hayward on me?

I think this minor setback will only STRENGTHEN the resolve of those of us who are tired of drowning in corporatocracy and who now see the White House attitude toward it's own political base all too well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:34 AM
Response to Reply #55
63. Welcome back. What kept you?
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #63
158. rofl
:spray:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #158
163. I think we both know. Shhhhhh....
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
humbled_opinion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #55
383. This Adminstation may not get the point until its poll numbers
equal its predecessors. I think America made its attitude toward Bush very clear with his 20 percent approval rating. Obama continuing to act just like Bush should earn him the same nubmers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:28 AM
Response to Original message
60. Well,
as labor has been "flushed down the toilet" by this administration they can kiss my A**

Where is the EFCA? :argh:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #60
151. The original version or the current, eviscerated version?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #151
156. I think I would prefer
The Classic Original Version.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #156
297. I fear you will be disappointed then. It's been gutted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sherman A1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #297
385. I expect to be disappointed with this crew
I wrote my Senator (McCaskill) last year on this topic and got a pretty much 'blow off" reply, so I knew a long time ago that we working folks were screwed.

Odd how those charming request for money mailings and emails from her go straight to the trash now.

I don't even bother to email anymore, it's completely a waste of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:33 AM
Response to Original message
62. Textbook campaign consultant-think...
...looking only at the money, and not thinking "y'know, maybe we need to shore up our support on the Labor front...." And yet he probably views himself as a "pragmatist".

Unions have learned that they don't rate any favors by backing the Democratic leadership early and faithfully. They just get used. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of faith that the current leadership is "pragmatic" enough to take the hint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Waiting For Everyman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:56 AM
Response to Original message
68. It wasn't wasted, it sent a $10 mil message.
And it's really arrogant and stupid that this WH comes out right away and directly thumbs its nose at that message.

That was like saying FU to union people, and all of us who aren't on the corporatist gravy-train.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:11 AM
Response to Original message
69. I'd be curious to see
how much money the White House and the DLC "flushed" in order to get the Lincoln victory. They weren't just spending advertising bucks in Arkansas. They were spending it in Missouri, possibly other neighboring states as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:57 AM
Response to Original message
74. "How DARE unions back the political candidate of their own choosing? What the hell do they think
this is? A frickin' democracy or something? We'll teach them!"

Democratic voters have been sending a message. Too bad the WH communicaions machine only trasmits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:58 AM
Response to Original message
75. it`s politico and ben smith.. the story is bullshit...
until proven otherwise.

the election was fucking rigged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #75
145. Diebold?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #145
152. there was a county that had 42 polling places...
the guy that runs the county`s elections reduced the number to--two.80,000 voters had to travel to two voting places. he also opened up the polling places sat but closed them with in a few hours because he found out it was "illegal" for him to do that...ya blanche had the fix in.

it was mentioned here and most of the liberal media
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #152
270. Garland County
home to Hot Springs. One of the larger counties in the state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #270
380. thanks..hard to remember all the stuff that`s happening
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #152
303. Thanks. That I had seen. I thought you meant the vote itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
disndat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #145
155. Suspicious, for sure.nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mystieus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:06 AM
Response to Original message
78. Politico.... meh
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #78
312. Meh, huh? Funny that nobody at the White House has denied this statement
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:08 AM
Response to Original message
79. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:09 AM
Response to Original message
80. Ben Smith has never been known to exaggerate.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:39 AM
Response to Reply #80
95. ya ...old ben has three sources going so far.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:10 AM
Response to Original message
81. Call Joe The Plumber ASAP!
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 05:12 AM by Hubert Flottz
Money spent for a good cause, is well spent.

It's too bad the US Senate wasn't flushed as well.

Edit...The log never falls very far from the log-jam.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RubyDuby in GA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:14 AM
Response to Original message
83. I think the unions should just have anouther "pointless exercise" and stay home this Nove
Ya know...since this WH hates them so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:28 AM
Response to Reply #83
90. Politico, with it's "unnamed sources" sure knows how to get liberals in a tizzie
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:33 AM
Response to Reply #90
94. Yeah and some just hate those liberals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:41 AM
Response to Reply #94
96. Only "some" liberals. When you manage to get rid of McCain & Kyl, then you can talk.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 05:50 AM by Tarheel_Dem
:hi:

ps: Weren't you crowing a couple of weeks ago about the president's lack of coattails (Specter v. Sestak). So, by your logic, you can hardly credit the WH with Lincoln's win, right? I mean, since he has no coattails, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:58 AM
Response to Reply #96
100. Where do I credit or not credit the WH in this topic? I think the WH comment
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 06:02 AM by saracat
about the unions was disgusting..And I really don't care WHO said it. It is indicative of the WH philosophy. And I really don't care if you believe me or not but I know that for a FACT. Many of those who work for the WH collaborate that. But believe as you wish. You will anyway. BTW, if the WH wants credit for coatails for a disreputable candidate, they can have it. Even so, It was a very close race, which should not have been for an incumbant Dem endorsed by the WH and with a lot of Party money and the machine behind her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #100
162. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #162
370.  So you would rather Democrats lose? If Gore had carried AZ, and he almost did,
we never would have had Bush. Any true Democrat never dismisses any state. And "Union Money" is not party money. It is offensive that you wouild state that. The Unions have discretion of how to spend their money and as of yesterday's WH comments, it may no longer go to the Democratic Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:05 AM
Response to Reply #96
102. Gee. maybe if the Democratic Party would get off their duff and nominate a winner we could.
but OFA is too busy getting ready for 2012 as that is all that counts. We send all our money to others states at the DNC request. Go figure. Maybe Rodney Glassman CAN take out McCain but he'll have to do it without party support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #102
172. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #172
345.  Do you realize Clinton carried Arizona and we have a Democratic Majority in our congressional
delegation? That we had the wealthiest State party in the nation and spent more on the Presidential race and other Federal elections than any other state party? And that President Obama took our Democratic Governor to be head of Homeland Sec? You really have no idea what you are saying. I am sure President Obama would be delighted to carry Arizona as Clinton did. Fortunately others are not as politically silly as you are.Ed Rendell personally told be one of his greatest regrets was that more money and President Clinton presence being added was not done ion AZ by the DNC because Gore would have won in AZ and made Bush unable to win.
Republican primary voters showed us who they are in Arizona, no one else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #345
348. AZ won't be able to elect a Democrat for dogcatcher after this. Have fun.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #348
354. Baloney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tarheel_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #354
359. Yeah, well good luck with that. (nt)
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:43 AM
Response to Reply #90
98. that`s what he paid to do and they are getting their money`s worth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:26 AM
Response to Original message
89. solidarity
I'll stand with the workers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedRoses323 Donating Member (175 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #89
340. Yes!
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #89
404. Always
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ima_sinnic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:52 AM
Response to Original message
99. and I flushed a couple hundred down the toilet in support of Obama
that is a mistake I won't make again, nor will I waste a vote on another corporate ass-kissing union-dissing fake "democrat."

Arkansas can now count on a Republican senator, because Democrats are going to sit that one out or vote third party. Bookmark it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Union Yes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:02 AM
Response to Original message
101. Today, I am a 3rd party voter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Grinchie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #101
104. I'm with you.
So long Republicrat stooges.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ima_sinnic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #101
223. me three
reregistered several months ago--but I still get fund appeals from the DLC corporacrats (DSCC, DCCC), go figure.
I use their postage-paid envelopes to explain in foul language why they won't get a dime from me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Omaha Steve Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:06 AM
Response to Original message
103. Remember this money comes from a voluntary PAC, NOT FROM DUES! by law

Last count had AFSCME kicking in 1.5 million $. I'm a proud contributor to the AFSCME PAC (must be an AFSCME member to contribute).

I have no problem with the $ AFSCME kicked in to kick her out. And there were shenanigans going on with the voters and numbers.

OS

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedstDem Donating Member (356 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:38 AM
Response to Original message
107. The white house has their collective foot in thier mouth
and are chewing away...

I'm actually contemplating sitting the next election out for the 1st time in my life.
I'm almost 50.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wial Donating Member (362 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
108. well, getting the administration
to show its hand has to have some value. At least we know which side they're on now. Not ours. Lesser of two evils, at best. One thing to win, another to be contemptuous of the working people. I trust this wasn't Obama himself, because he was once a community organizer. More likely Rahm, who's probably still in a mood after his IDF friends slaughtered a bunch of activists and he had to figure out some way that was ok and anyone who criticized it deserved to be fired. It's the kind of bloody-minded, mean-spirited thing he would say.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #108
319. PLease see Replies 176. 244. and 245.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 01:14 PM by No Elephants
Obama can't believe something like this because he was once a community organizer for 3 years--before going to law school and spending over 20 years in politics?

That doesn't hold up to any analysis whatever.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SILVER__FOX52 Donating Member (460 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:43 AM
Response to Original message
111. If this is true..........
the White house can kiss my ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Demit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:45 AM
Response to Original message
112. I think the real pointed message was from the unions to the White House.
A 10 million dollar message: "We will not back candidates who don't back unions."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #112
115. What a misinformed position.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 07:09 AM by robcon
Halter doesn't support unions any more than Lincoln does (please cite if you disagree.) It was just an exercise in raw power by the unions - to attempt to intimidate future Democrats through the threat of union support of alternative Democrats in primaries.

It was money down the toilet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedstDem Donating Member (356 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #115
136. You've got a point
Try and find a real politician to represent the interest of working people in Arkansas.

aint gonna happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jeff47 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #115
148. Wow are you small-time
Lincoln has literally campaigned as pro-union, and then govern as anti-union. She's been at the fore of blocking a lot of legislation labor wants. The plan was to get a primary challenger so she has to tack left to cover her ass.

She got a primary challenger.
She tacked left.
She barely survived the primary due to her leftward shift.

Doesn't seem like such a waste if one pays attention to the entire process, instead of falling into the media's lazy "horse race" style analysis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #115
228. It would appear that you are as anti-union as the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueDemKev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #115
346. I agree
While I for the most part support what labor unions stand for, I do not always agree with their strong-armed tactics as they tried to use here. That money could have and should have gone to protecting the 50 or so vulnerable House seats we need to defend if we're going to have ANY kind of pro-worker policies left in this country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:54 AM
Response to Original message
113. Did Obama say that? Nope.
nuff said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:23 AM
Response to Reply #113
119. Yes, he did. By proxy.
The "senior White House official" either spoke for the president, or he's on the presidential shit-list.

If there's a resignation or apology from a "senior White House official", then I'll believe the prez didn't approve the statement.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:35 AM
Response to Reply #119
173. Was it? I mean haven't we all spent 8 years on DU NOT trusting the Media
And suddenly someone from the Media claims that a "Senoir White House Offical" made an awful remark like that and we believe the Media?

Personally I rank "White House Offical" up there with Fox's "Some People Say" comment. We have no clue who the hell this is but the media 'found' someone (or invented) and made it a news story. We just need one news outlet to create the story and the rest of us are on it like flies on shit.

Shame on us!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JustABozoOnThisBus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #173
191. I saw a number of articles on this topic
and some attribute the quote to "a White House aide". I assume that would be a much lower position than "senior White House official". Maybe an unseasoned kid with one or two beers in the belly, wanting to sound important to some news reporter.

In which case it would not be "Obama by Proxy".

If the story has legs, then eventually the source will be unveiled.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #191
193. Senior White House Official could be the head chef or chief lawnkeeper of the Rose Garden
or it could be the figment of someone writers imagination since they probably didn't have a source.

If it's a real story a named person will discuss it. I think what pisses us off is if the story is truly heinous even Obama won't stoop to justifying the story. The Media WANTS Obama to comment on what was said but if he does then he only propagates the story as being real.

It's like having some horrible rumor being spread about you that you know is untrue but if you defend yourself it only keeps the rumor alive and adds some sort of validity to the story. That's why my Dad said you should just ignore rumors - if you do people will get bored and it will die out. And you know what Dad was right (hey I was a highschooler - I know how that shit is).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #113
225. Ah, yes. No one Obama hired to work in theWH--and can fire--ever speaks for him,
even his press secretary. We heard all that when Napolitano, Gibbs and every other relevant member of the Obamadmin was saying Obama would not veto a health care reform bill that lacked a public option. It was as silly then as it is now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:21 AM
Response to Original message
118. A victory for the Obama administration.
I think this was a victory for the White House and for local Democratic parties.

Lincoln Bucks Tide
By JEFF ZELENY and ADAM NAGOURNEY Published: June 8, 2010

WASHINGTON Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas survived a tough challenge from her partys left wing on Tuesday to capture the Democratic nomination in a runoff primary election, resisting the anti-incumbent wave that has defined the midterm election year.

Mrs. Lincoln withstood a multi-million-dollar campaign against her from organized labor, environmental groups and liberal advocacy organizations from outside Arkansas as she prevailed over Lt. Gov. Bill Halter. She faces a difficult contest in the fall, but her victory challenges the suggestion that voters are poised to oust all officeholders.

We proved that this senators vote is not for sale and neither is yours, Mrs. Lincoln said. We took on the outside groups seeking to manipulate our votes.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/09/us/politics/09elect.h...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #118
122. 51% in a Primary is not a victory for anyone running for re-election
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 07:28 AM by AllentownJake
Shit load of fences to mend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #122
135. You're right, the problem is, of course, the fences to mend.
The union attempt to hijack the Arkansas Senate race was disgraceful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:40 AM
Response to Reply #135
139. I think by Lincoln's donations
She had plenty of outside hijacking on her side as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #139
153. +1000 And I'm betting it wasn't groups who support workers. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moochy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #135
195. WTF Hijack? A Primary Challenge is a hijacker?
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 09:16 AM by Moochy
Your misguided OP cheering on Rahm got so many recs. And not for the reason you hoped.

Sneer all you want at unions, corporatist stooges.... keep sneering and jeering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedstDem Donating Member (356 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #135
256. Anti union asshats like you should go to Haiti
go work there and stop polluting my beautiful country..
D bag
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #135
324. Hijack? Disgraceful? LOL.
Please see Reply 74 and the posts on this thread about the dirty tricks used against Halter.

The notion that the DNC should control primaries and that incumbents are owed nominations for as long as they want them are whatt's disgraceful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidwparker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
129. Did they get to the bottom of why 48 precincts were closed in an area
where Halter won big? Only two were opened in comparison to primary day where there were 50.

I know they were offering Saturday for early voting, but AK law says no voting on Saturday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicalmajority Donating Member (78 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:37 AM
Response to Original message
133. SOUNDS LIKE RAHM EMANUEL SAID IT
If not it is one of his very close subordinates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lorien Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #133
249. Yep. He should be sent away to play with his super soaker. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:38 AM
Response to Original message
134. A very close race, and the WH sends a message along with
Linoln, fuck labor. How nice to have that validated.

The money was well spent, and THAT is what pisses off the WH. Expect more challenges to come, not less Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #134
137. The money was wasted. Halter is no more pro-union than Lincoln.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 07:40 AM by robcon
It was all a charade by the unions.

edit:spell
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #137
141. Charade my foot, the WH was not happy to have a challenge and
they will see more of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #141
142. In other words, you think Halter was more pro-union than Lincoln
Got any cites or links to support that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #142
154. You keep reposting this false premise, you can try and frame it
that way, but it would still remain a false premise. I don't think you appreciate what this challenge represented. This was not solely about
Halter being more pro union than Lincoln. This article sums up the issues and motivations pretty well. The WH will indeed not appreciate
their efforts, because as a result of the money spent they came very close to pushing her out and that fact pisses them off imo. Btw, Labor is well aware of Halter's political positions.

snip* "I'm conservative on some issues and I'm progressive on others," Halter said in an interview at the annual Toad Suck Daze festival in Conway, Ark. "In terms of fiscal policy, I'm as conservative as anyone -- and I'm more conservative than the incumbent."

* on card check: Halter's position on the issue is unclear. Asked about it in an interview, Halter did not say how he would vote because the bill "is no longer being discussed." Halter said he favors a compromise that includes imposing sanctions on those who try to inhibit "democratic elections

Labor organizers said they are so furious with moderate Democrats they will do anything to purge Lincoln. Her defeat, they said, would send a warning to Democrats everywhere that support from labor cannot be taken for granted.

"You do this to win, and Arkansas will be much better off with Bill Halter representing it," said Steve Rosenthal, a former political director of the AFL-CIO who is organizing anti-Lincoln efforts. "But short of that, the fact that Lincoln has had to fight this kind of fight, raise the money to do it . . . and to the extent that other senators see what's happening in Arkansas and think twice about it, this becomes -- win, lose or draw -- a very important fight."

snip* But Jon Youngdahl, national political director of SEIU, which is running more than $1 million in ads across the state, said, "It doesn't do us any good to conjecture what it means if we lose." The race, he said, is a symbol of "the frustration that people have had with the vote in favor of the Bush bailouts, then the long delays in getting health-care enacted, the lack of attention to job creation and the inability to pass Employee Free Choice Act." (end) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...


To continue to support Lincoln, now that would have been a waste of money. If you really want a shift, you have to be willing to take your
chances and fight like hell...they came very close.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #154
181. delete wrong place
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 08:50 AM by laughingliberal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #142
171. Saw him interviewed on Ed yesterday. He did say he was working with union officials on EFCA
Did not say he'd vote for card check but, rather, a compromise which is being worked out. Not an overwhelming show of support but I doubt Lincoln will vote even for a weak EFCA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #137
233. Sounds like you are really anti-union.
Yeah, those workers don't have any right to be meddling in politics by attempting to out an anti-labor DINO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedstDem Donating Member (356 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
140. It was worth every penny Rahm....
We're not stopping either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:48 AM
Response to Original message
146. a very divisive thing to say/do. But then, what does anyonne expect from a machine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jester Messiah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
150. The truth hurts.
Not that I'm a Blanche supporter, far from it... but she's probably as blue as most Arkansans can take and still vote Dem (as the primary indicates), so why waste money blowing against the wind? The money would have been better spent elsewhere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:32 PM
Response to Reply #150
328. What truth? The money was not wasted AT ALL.

I donated to Halter rom Massachusetts and consider the money well spent. If anything flushed a toilet, it was his arrogant, foolish remark.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
159. Can Halter run as an Independent in the General, or has that time passed? eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
165. Why do they keep calling Rahm an anonymous senior official
It's not like we don't know Rahm's crap when he spews it and he spews it more often than someone with stomach flu.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
168. One thing this Administration understands is flushing
money down the toilet. They have done an excellent job of that. What a stupid thing to say, but very eye opening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rasputin1952 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
170. Politics ain't Beanbag...
This is just the way it goes. I can think of a thousand ways I'd like to see money spent that would benefit the people of this nation, but I don't blame the WH for how Unions spend their money, and I've been a Union supporter for decades. I think it's kind of a dumb complaint.

It just seems to me, that reading some of the responses in this thread, that if PO suddenly came up w/away to deal with everything at once, and Peace broke out across the world, there would be some people that would crucify PO and the Administration.

I find it more interesting that two candidates in CA spent tons of cash for jobs that pay a pittance compared to what they are spending. $60-80 million dollars were spent each by Fiorina and Whitman and people just pass over that, but someone finds a piece that can be used against the WH, and people flock in to take their shots.

I am not a fan of Lincoln, but I don't live in AR either, and will not have a chance to vote in the General there. Whom PO decides to endorse is the issue, unless you live in AR, I can't see the problem. Halter would have been a better candidate IMO, but such is life. I'm a little more worried about the county that decided they could get get away w/just 2 polling places than I am about money already spent.

I guess some people will just look for anything to bash PO over, rather than work a little harder on getting things done that would bring about Equality for a portion of our society, get us out of the damned wars or a host of other problems. It is just a case of, "Oh, someone mentioned the WH or PO, lets get a big stick and beat him up for a while."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
174. And what have labor unions won with the goodwill of the White House?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inchhigh Donating Member (182 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:41 AM
Response to Original message
175. Speaking of flushing
I just have to say that more and more it feels like it was my vote and efforts for Ombama that were flushed down the toilet.

I have always said the the biggest regret of my political life is that i didn't vote for Jimmy Carter (voted for Anderson). As regrets go, my vote for Obama is running a very close second.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freddie mertz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #175
183. I remember trying to talk people out of voting for Anderson.
As for Obama, there was no other "choice," but I feel very let down by what has followed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FailureToCommunicate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:44 AM
Response to Original message
176. "Good morning White House!" Scott Brown was supposed to be a wake up call; THIS $10 Million
spent on the more Left candidate is a wake up call... What will it take for them to WAKE UP?!? This is like the WH and DLC are stuck in the beginning of "Groundhog Day"

Rahm sounded jealous "... If even half that total had been well-targeted..."

And, of course, the $10 million WAS wasted: It went to media ad buys, like most wasted campaign money.

Think how much good that kind of cash could've done anywhere else: school districts, cancer research, food banks, Red Cross...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FailureToCommunicate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #176
333. Add: Some perspective here. BP has just spent $50 MILLION on TV and print ads to
try to clean up it's image -as if that were even possible at this point! Beyond making newspapers and station executives happy for the ad buys, this $50 mil COULD have gone to do some good in the Gulf region couldn't it?

http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/03/news/companies/bp_haywa...

Disgusting.

I agree with Robert Reich: Privatize the US branch of BP. Our Gulf restored before stockholders paid...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoodleyAppendage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
178. FUCK YOU, RAHM EMANUEL! You are lower than the scum on a Teabagger's loafers.
Plus, you couldn't get your DINO/DLC Blanche installed without CHEATING!

J
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duchess Donating Member (121 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
179. Actually, it sounds like they are scared. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
182. My email to the White House, aka exercise in futility
I am writing to let you know that, once again, the progressives in our party who stand for traditional Democratic values were treated to an insult out of your administration. I still remember the 'fucking retarded' comment about groups raising money to pressure lawmakers to support the public option which, as I recall, was an issue you campaigned on in the primaries regardless of the fact you later denied this.
Working people continue to struggle and lose ground as we have for 3 decades. They voted for you with great hope of seeing that trend reversed. Little has been done to stand up to the forces driving us down and now your administration insults a group which stands for improving our lives.
We never saw an apology to the groups who were called 'fucking retarded' and I don't expect we'll see one now. Instead we continue to be told, in every way possible, you're just not that into us. I predict that is starting to cut both ways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluetexas Donating Member (13 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
184. No, I am pissed
I want the name of the idiot who said this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SocialistLez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
185. Labor needs to start giving to Green Party and Socialist candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pundaint Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #185
215. Green is a lovely color. Their platform is also lovely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
186. That White House 'official'
is certainly a vindictive, nasty, petty little prick. Gee, I wonder who that could be???

DLCers have openly worked to marginalize unions for years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
187. Typical of this administration's language and style
A vicious, divisive gloat. Just about as petty as can be imagined.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
188. United we stand, but divided we fall.
Why spend so much against one another, when we should save it for defeating the GOP?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #188
239. ... Because a conservative blue dog Dem ain't that much different than a GOP candidate?
I still for the life of me don't understand why progressives are still sticking with the Dem party, when it is obvious that it just serves as a low pass filter to get progressive candidates out of the election cycle.

In every primary cycle the likelihood is that it involves 1 conservative Dem vs. 1 progressive Dem, while the GOP fleets 2 conservative candidates against each other. Meaning that there is a 75% probably that a conservative will be elected to the specific office. That is stacking the bases in a gross manner, and one of the reasons why progressives are being filtered out of the government offices: they need to fight on the primaries AND the election. Whereas conservatives are guaranteed to make it to the election no matter what.


It is time to smell the coffee and support progressive platforms, even if they are outside of the Dem party. Since it seems the function of the party is to slow down progressive candidatures/platforms. Rather than actually supporting them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Stranger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #239
305. As a Progressive, I agree, but anything is better than the 8 years of Neocon Bush Junta rule.
We should pick our battles and not make perfect the enemy of the good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #305
338. UGH! Rahm wore out that cliche when taking his tantrums about holding out for a public option.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 02:03 PM by No Elephants
Thing is he was lying and he knew it. Medicare for all (single payer) was the perfect, not the public option. (And even single payer would not really have been perfect.)

Halter would not have been perfect, either. But allowing incumbents to go unchecked is folly.

BTW, Lincoln was not running against Bush. No one is, or ever will. And, if Democrats stop acting like Bush acted, Democratic voters will stop trying to unseat them. Until then, trying to unseat them is the only hope of getting hem to act like Democrats, instead of like Demlicans or Republicrats.

DONE WITH DINOS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #188
332. Because we should fight to unseat incumbents whose votes and other behavior we disapprove of?
It's the Democratic Party, not the Incumbents' Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
189. Union official: White House just flushed 10 million votes down the toilet.
Okay I made it up. Still true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bodhi BloodWave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #189
261. and even with an admittance of being made up
your comment has more credibility then the 'anonymous senior white house offical' mainly due to actually having a name attached to it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
190. All I had to do was read the title to know it was Politico and Emanuel. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burnsei sensei Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
194. The White House
has no business telling organized labor what to do.
I have yet to see such willingness to lead with respect to the oil industry.
I have yet to see a genuine pro-labor anti-corporatism.
I want labor unions to grow and grow. They are the historically proven weapon against the whores of corporate America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
abelenkpe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
196. A white house official?
BS. Politico would love to see dems fighting amongst themselves. I call BS on the whole thing. Since it's based on an anonymous source this entire article is better suited for the gossip pages and not taken seriously. It's a quote from a chicken with no balls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NobleCynic Donating Member (991 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #196
366. This. Politico is not to be trusted, especially when no names are mentioned. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kokonoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
199. It was the best $10 million ever spent.
The primary is the only opportunity to take back our party.

And thats less money for corporate sellouts, to use a workers donation and pretend they're a democrat.

$20 million in the right direction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pattmarty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
200. My response to that is; "suck my dick and good luck motherfuckers in 2012".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #200
343. Stop mincing words and say how you really feel!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #200
375. yeah... cant wait to hear the next round of promises and lies in 2012
they can blow me i give up
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crowman1979 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
203. Congratulation White House! You've just made yourself an enemy of the working-class.
Now go and sell-out like you always do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #203
230. Well, they didn't "just make themselves an enemy".
The Democratic Party "Centrist" leadership has ALWAYS been an enemy of LABOR and the Working Class since the 80s. They have simply made their allegiance to Corporate Management undeniable.
They have also publicly admitted that they NEVER really wanted a "Public Option".
The whole thing was a sham.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lydia Leftcoast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:39 AM
Response to Original message
207. Mainstream pols always support the incumbent
even if the incumbent is more like a Republican than like a Democrat (cf. Lieberman).

It's not, "Stand up for principles." It's "Keep our little club safe from outsiders."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
208. organized labor aint getting much love from this DLC, corporate boot-licking admin
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fearless Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #208
210. +1000000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #208
254. misplaced --
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 11:07 AM by defendandprotect
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yurbud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-10-10 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #254
406. misplaced hope in Obama?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
209. They DID flush it down the toilet. For a candidate not much different than the one they were against
It would have made sense of Halter actually was vastly more progressive than Lincoln. But that wasn't the case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elzenmahn Donating Member (124 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:55 AM
Response to Original message
213. Not surprised, but disappointed...
...that Lincoln won, and to be perfectly honest, it won't matter who wins the general in this race now since her voting patterns (and funding sources) are really no different than most repubs. In fact (and I never thought I would say this about a Dem), but I hope she loses in November...

As for the unions "throwing money down the toilet"...please remember:

1. Obama is not, and never really was, a true progressive;
2. The unions are the enemy of both parties, not just the repubs;
3. Our political system today, thanks to Reagan, the Bushes, and Clinton, cannot handle a true progressive in the White House. The oligarchs who really run things won't tolerate it.

I'll accept the loss, as I contributed to Halter's campaign. And I don't see it as money thrown down the toilet, even though he lost - I see it as free speech, just like the Supreme Court said money is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Sparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
214. Good luck on getting the progressive base to come out and voting for that piece of crap. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
olegramps Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
216. The Obama Administration has just sealed its doom!
Does anyone need further proof that the Democratic Party has failed the working class then when a Democratic administration endorses an anti-labor DINO and then ridicules the Unions' endorsement of a candidate that who would actually represent their interest. I am beginning to actually believe that Obama may be a one term president. Without the unions' support I can't imagine him winning reelection. I suppose that it wasn't enough to lose the support of the Teachers' Unions, now they have succeeded in alienating the entirety of organized labor.

The change in the attitudes of many people here on DU is nothing short of dramatic. The groundswell of enthusiasm when Obama was elected and the great expectations have been replaced with bitter disappointment that increases daily. So far this administration has been a flop when it came to addressing the major issues.

I hope that I will live long enough to see the working class class come to their senses and unite as they did during the depression before the are driven to the point of desperation. I sincerely hope that a candidate from the organized labor can launch a successful bid for the nomination. Hopefully a person who actually represents the interests of the working class in contrast to the those who only provide labor lip service.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jefferson23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
220. Democrats to organized labor: drop dead
Wednesday, Jun 9, 2010 07:10 ET

By Gabriel Winant



For an entity that's supposedly the bought-and-paid-for servant of organized labor, the Democratic Party sure has a hell of a way of showing it. When it looked like Arkansas Lt. Gov. Bill Halter's labor-backed challenge to Sen. Blanche Lincoln in the Democratic primary was going to succeed, Lincoln's backers in the Democratic establishment tried to turn the race into a referendum on organized labor. And it worked. Lincoln won her primary last night. Then her allies turned on the unions for not toeing the party line. In other words, the critics have it backward: it's not Democrats who are supposed to act like labor's servants, it's labor that's expected to act like it belongs to the party, with no reciprocal obligations.

First of all, though, maybe we all got a little ahead of ourselves in imagining that Halter had this thing sewn up. He was never ahead by more than a few points in a few polls. So it might be that Lincoln's comeback doesnt need that much analysis at all. These things happen all the time.

But if were going to analyze it, here are some things to keep in mind: like every Southern state, Arkansas is right-to-work, meaning that it has labor laws that are particularly unfriendly to unions. It has the sixth lowest union density in the country, and is home to Wal-Mart, the bugbear of the union movement.

Moreover, the South has always been the graveyard of the union movement. Southern companies traditionally manage the most hard-assed opposition to unions, and they have a long legacy of success to draw on. For over a century, Southern conservatives have labeled union activists as radicals and meddlers, likely to endanger what Southern workers hold dear. In the 1940s, the CIO (it hadn't yet merged with the AFL) ran a major effort to organize Southern industry, and to elect friendly politicians alongside. After some initial success, the CIO saw its two best Southern friends in the Senate -- Florida's Claude Pepper and North Carolina's Frank Graham -- go down unexpectedly in 1950 primary challenges. The lesson then, as now, was that it's not really in the power of organized labor to determine Southern elections. Yesterday, labor relearned the ironic lesson that endless millionaire vanity candidates have been taught: spending a big pile of money on a campaign can't make up for a missing base of institutional support or a determined opposition that does have one.


The way conservative Democrats ran against Pepper and Graham and bashed the CIO in earlier years is much the same as the way they stood up for Lincoln. One newspaper warned in the late 1930s, "The record proves undeniably that when friction and fighting arises in a community, especially among the Anglo-Saxons of the South, it is the result of the deliberate efforts of outsiders who come in for the specific purposes of creating disturbances." A Georgia radio host captured the essence of Southern anti-union rhetoric when he said in 1946, "Do you value your independence as a Southern American? The unsophisticated Southerner, never having seen nor experienced the North, may listen to this alluring propaganda not realizing that he is surrendering independence and personal freedom." (I've lifted these examples from historian Michelle Brattain's book, The Politics of Whiteness.)

Compare that talk with Bill Clinton's, campaigning for Lincoln. The unions, Clinton accused, are "using you and manipulating your vote." They wanted to make Lincoln a poster child for "what happens when a Democrat crosses us." Lincoln herself refers to the unions backing Halter as "those D.C. unions." On Monday, she said, "Tomorrow, when all those outsiders who flooded the state get back on their airplanes and buses to go back where they came from, our campaign will stay rooted right here in Arkansas." Get it?

SEIU and AFSCME, the two major unions backing Halter, have always denied that they were outsiders invading Arkansas, looking for the scalp of a disobedient senator. But they've got to deny it, even though it's obviously what they were doing. Lincoln, a senator beloved by the Chamber of Commerce, helped kill the public option and the Employee Free Choice Act -- labor's top priority. And she only tacked left on financial reform because of the primary challenge. So it's entirely appropriate that organized labor would try to hold her to account. But with no base of their own in the state, the unions ran headlong into the obstacle that's always blocked them in the South: business-backed conservative Democrats, like Clinton and Lincoln, who are willing to stick together against labor.

What's worse, the White House has made pretty clear what it thinks of labor's efforts to stand up for itself. An anonymous senior official who sounds a lot like Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel told Politico's Ben Smith last night, "Organized labor just flushed $10 million of their members' money down the toilet on a pointless exercise. If even half that total had been well-targeted and applied in key House races across this country, that could have made a real difference in November."

Actually, $5 million wouldnt amount to that much in the grand scheme of the fight for Congress. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has already raised $80 million this year, and spent $53 million in the 2010 cycle. And the real action hasn't gotten going yet. All of that is on top of spending by actual candidates, and given the rapidly diminishing returns on massive campaign expenditures, an extra $5 million probably wouldn't make a "real difference."

But that's not the real point the senior official was making. What's being said there, instead, is that organized labor is just an adjunct to the Democrats. Unions shouldn't expect to get the party to move on their main issues, and they shouldn't fight about it. The best they can hope for is that Democrats stay in power and keep workers from being screwed too fast or too dramatically.

Imagine if the president and Bill Clinton had instead thrown in with Halter. I know it's unthinkable for establishment Democrats to do this kind of thing, but just play along: what if they had said that it's important for Democrats to understand that there are consequences for a senator who repeatedly betrays her party and the progressive agenda? It's hard to imagine Lincoln could have pulled it out with Clinton campaigning against her.

In other words, elite Democrats had a real choice, and they decided to stand with the Chamber of Commerce and treat the unions like the misbehaving hired help. They ran the same campaign that conservative Southern Democrats have been running for the better part of a century to keep labor out of the South, and it worked.

But this is the campaign that has been undercutting progressives in general for decades. As long as labor is weak in the South, it's weak everywhere. Runaway plants move from union-friendly states to right-to-work ones like Arkansas, killing the unions where they're strong and driving down wages. Without strong unions, working-class voters are much less likely to vote for progressives, or even Democrats at all. And why should they? With wages stagnant and inequality constantly growing, how much has mainstream center-center-left liberalism shown that it still has to offer?

The direction we're headed in, judging by that White House official, is for Democrats to show the door to working-class voters. For years, Democratic leaders have desperately want theirs to be the party of upper-middle-class suburban professionals. And if Blanche Lincoln loses in November to her Republican challenger, as she probably will, all we'll be able to say is that Democrats got their wish: they wrote off working people, and working people wrote them off too.

Gabriel Winant

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/06/09/...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
221. What assholery! No mystery who the WH works for. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
on point Donating Member (613 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
222. Not $$$ wasted, but a shot across the bow, a warning to the White house
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
224. This is how the media keeps us divided. Why exactly would a White
House official say that? has anyone asked themselves that question before jumping to conclusions? What would the motive be? And if it was said, maybe the context wasn't delivered properly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #224
253. Why would Obama and Clinton be supporting Lincoln . . . or Lieberman ?????
Or Arlen Specter???

Those are the questions to be asked!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #224
353. Like 'fucking retards?"
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 02:38 PM by No Elephants
The DLC wing of PNAC decided to divide Democrats long before it occurred to the media that dividing Democrats was a possibility. Democrats are just now waking up and fighting back.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueDemKev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-10-10 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #353
408. "Dividing" Democrats
The DLC was created in 1985 after the Mondale-Ferraro debacle in an attempt to "modernize" the party so it could start winning national elections again (at that point we had lost 4 out of the last 5 elections, 2 of them by 49 states).

Democrats dividing occured long before the DLC was created. Remember all the congressional Democrats in 1981 who supported Reagan's tax cuts? What about back in the early 1960s when the party was deeply divided over the issue of civil rights? President Kennedy actually made a trip to Texas in late 1963 to try and heal the warring factions within the party (didn't go so well, did it?).

And wasn't it during the 1930's when Will Rogers said, "I am a member of no organized political party. I am a Democrat."

The Democratic Party has always been a coalition of diversified groups and individuals, but those differences began to hurt us about 30 years ago with the backlash against affirmative action and the globalization of the economy began to take hold.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidwestTransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
227. Rahm is obviously that "senior" official.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
229. DU loves Politco and anonymous sources!!!!
+28 recs!

As long as it's pro-Blanche Lincoln and anti-labor!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wandawilkerson Donating Member (68 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #229
296. The rec's don't mean the recommenders agree with the anonymous source
I recommended because I want the White House's anti-union comment to be exposed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #229
390. well seems to me the White House can deny it or expose who said it ..pretty easy solution..
if the White house does not deny it, then there is a balless, gutless wonder in this white house in a senior position..it seems..

I can not for one moment believe ( having been a lifelong union member and a husband who was a VP for a very sucessful National union..not the AFL-CIO ..) the AFL-CIO would respond to just a Politico story without real facts of who said what..and the Union didn't hide behind an anonymous Union person..his name is wide spread all over the internet now!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
238. Obviously, the corruption of our election process is deep and wide ....
that's the only way I can see that Blanche Lincoln held onto her office!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #238
243. Lincoln held her office because Halter held identical positions.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 10:51 AM by robcon
Halter outspent Lincoln, but was rebuffed. The corruption was by the unions, not Lincoln.

There was no THERE there... Halter was not any more pro-union than Lincoln was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #243
252. Are you an Arkansas voter? The union was corrupt?
Want to add some details there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #243
358. You've exhausted that poor straw man. Not one post I've seen so far on this thread
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 02:50 PM by No Elephants
claims that Halter is more pro-Union than Lincoln.

And Lincoln held her position by dirty tricks.

Still, the message got tsent.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
242. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #242
245. I'll vote for the Democrat.
You can vote for the "symbolism," if you want.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #245
266. This admin does not care if Blanch loses.
All they care about is not having a progressive win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frylock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #245
272. seems to me that you're the one voting for the symbolism
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
250. Or Obama could just FREAKIN' DO SOMETHING for organized labor. How'd that be? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooglymoogly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
255. Blanch Lincoln relied heavily on voter suppression, The polls belie the result.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 11:14 AM by ooglymoogly
It was a fixed election.

It was a crooked election.

Fixed elections are becoming the norm in this country; especially in red states.

And nobody raises a peep; or a bah-ah-aaah in this case.

The sheep have been shorn to close to the skin and are bleeding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:16 AM
Response to Original message
258. They just threw their money away too. She not going to win. Everybody hates her!
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 11:16 AM by Joanne98
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
colsohlibgal Donating Member (670 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
265. This Removes Any Doubt
Any doubt that is, by any rational progressive, that the White House and official democratic apparatus is not really your friend unless you have a couple of million in the bank. Sorry apologists, but I don't know how you read this any other way.

I'm highly suspicious of the vote in Arkansas, it's just the latest race (Kerry/Bush, Demint/Cleland for example) where the loser, always the more liberal candidate, has a comfortable lead in the polls right up to the election then strangely loses. Something is rotten, and certainly not in Denmark.

The deck becomes more stacked every day, it's going to be one Hell of an uphill battle to change the US from an increasingly corporate state back to a true democracy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #265
278. I think you're wrong on several counts
1. 'Obama is not your friend.' I think you are very, very mistaken. Obama is one of the best presidents of the last 100 years. He got health care passed.

2. 'I'm highly suspicious of the vote' I'm highly suspicious of your suspicions. Your guy didn't win - so you call foul. Sounds like amateur hour, unless you have more evidence than that.

3. the loser, always the more liberal candidate' Halter was not more liberal than Lincoln. His positions were identical, although he would have to have been beholden to the unions if he had won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #278
310. IMO Halter has better positions on:
1) Banks. From his campaign website: "I support the strongest possible reforms to do this, and I hope Congress addresses this in a way that gets real results for Arkansas families, not just another Washington shell game. We need an independent watchdog agency, stronger enforcement of what's already on the books, an end to sky-high corporate compensation, and better checks and balances on the more outrageous financial industry practices."

2) The environment

3) Health care (thought Lincoln bowed to the insurance companies in weakening the bill)

4) Unions, which are very important to the middle class

Obama is what we have right now and we should support him over the Republicans for sure, but it's too early to call him one of the best Presidents. There's still a lot of work to be done in passing progressive legislation; the President needs to push harder in that direction or there won't even be much incremental change. And although reforming health care was a milestone, we'll see how much it actually helps people with affordability and whether there are too many loopholes.

As far as the stolen election goes, I'm not sure in this case, but a close eye is always a good thing because elections are vital to our democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #310
393. Sounds exactly like Lincoln's positions.
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-10-10 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #393
407. I don't agree
Edited on Thu Jun-10-10 01:08 AM by mvd
If you look at Lincoln's positions, they are all watered down. And no wonder, with the money she has taken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueDemKev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #265
342. Cleland's Loss in 2002
Look, I'm from Georgia and while I was devastated by Cleland's loss in 2002, I can assure you there was nothing "funny" about the voting. At the time, the Democrats controlled both the legislature and the governorship (and even Zell Miller campaigned hard for Cleland).

What happened was this--Cleland was leading in mid-September, but his lead dwindled rapidly in the remaining five weeks before the election. Georgia is rabidly anti-union (and voters were still reeling heavily from 9/11), and they were furious at Cleland for backing (even though half-heartedly) employee protection regulations in the newly-created Dept. of Homeland Security (even though every federal govt agency has such rules for their employees). The Republicans were able to perfectly spin it and make it look as though Cleland was more concerned about receiving union $$$ than he was about protecting the country from another terrorist attack. Chambliss held a slight lead in most polls going into election day, but still the race was pretty much a toss-up. The final nail in the coffin was LOW TURNOUT among African-American voters in Atlanta. Election day was cold and rainy and many of them just stayed home. Had there been a heavier turnout in DeKalb and Clayton counties, Cleland probably would have squeaked through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #342
360. Those facts are entirely different from the facts of this runoff, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluethruandthru Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
273. The white house should be pissed at Blanche..not at the unions!
Blanche turned her back on the party - many times - including the President. Obama should have learned to play hardball with DINO's. Those who don't support him fully on key issues should be left flapping in the wind at election time....and the president should throw his support to the primary challenger!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jxnmsdemguy65 Donating Member (481 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
276. Bullshit. Organized labor got it's point across...
Southern dems will now have to watch out for threats to their left... and that's a good thing. Hopefull will keep them on their toes!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomClash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
280. Profile in Cowardice
Assuming this story is true, the "Senior White House Official" is a coward to call Ben Smith, make a very pointed statement and then refuse to have it attributed to him or her. That Senior Staffer sure sets a great example for the soldiers laying their lives on the line in Afghanistan. Not exactly a profile in courage
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
4lbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
282. In a way, it's correct, even though it was a bad way to state it.
Arkansas' union membership is almost nil.

There are 2.8 million people in Arkansas, but only about 85,000 belong to a union. That's just 3% of the population.

By comparison, New York has 25% of it's population in unions, and California, Washington, and Hawaii have around 20% of their state population in unions.

Arkansas is also the home of Wal-Mart, which is about as anti-union as a company could get.

It's going to be difficult for any union-backed candidate to win in a state that has almost no union membership, and whose top company is notoriously anti-union.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoccoR5955 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
293. They ought to be careful of that.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 12:36 PM by RoccoR5955
The unions backed Obama. There may be repercussions for that. Even though union membership is low, there have been a number of smaller unions who are on the rise. It's only a matter of time until things come back around. It just proves who owns them. They are again working for the corporations, and not WE THE PEOPLE.

We need to take our country back.

Personally I'd vote for Kucinich, Sanders, or Grayson in a primary in a New York second, over Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
298. 'My name is Eddie Vale of the AFL-CIO & I don't hide behind anonymous quotes'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
317. More un-named WH officials quoted by Politico.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueDemKev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
337. A Tactical Remark
This remark reeks with a tactical purpose. With the average independent voter (not necessarily primary voters) saying they're frustrated by extremism on both sides and lack of any cooperation whatsoever, the Obama Administration is trying to show that while it generally supports pro-worker policies, they are not "owned" by the unions. The problem is that many union folks (like those posting on here) are feeling slighted while those who are ardently anti-union will not be mollified. Independents were key to getting Obama and Democrats elected two years ago and they will again be key in our keeping control of Congress.

To union supporters, if you think that the Democrats' policies towards workers/unions is bad, just wait until you see what the Tea-Bag Party will do.

And to union opponents, I say if corporatism and greed didn't have the tendency to go so far off the deep end, unions would never have been created in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Second Stone Donating Member (603 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
339. How about they identify the official
as Rahm Emmanuel, or whoever it was. Letting them get away with an anonymous snipe is useless. They need to know that we will primary our enemies, and Lincoln is one of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WileEcoyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:08 PM
Response to Original message
344. But was the statement all that inaccurate?
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 02:10 PM by WileEcoyote
Blunt, maybe even condescending, however not entirely wrong.

While I agree that Blanche Lincoln isn't the best Democrat, had the ten mil been spent around other races later on it surely would have helped more Democrats.

As it is we'll be lucky if Blanche Lincoln even holds her seat.

We still haven't recovered from 30 years of ultra Conservative governing. Best to stock up on even tepid Democrats until the tide shifts more.

After all it isn't like Arkansas is a Liberal minded state. Lincoln faces a very uphill battle in November after being beaten to a bloody pulp by a divided Democratic Party.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #344
363. You're assuming union money is supposed to be spent in accordance with
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 03:06 PM by No Elephants
the wishes of the WH and that the objective of unions is to elect Democrats. Those are the same fallacious assumptions the unnamed WH official seems to have made. The unions have already responded hose fallacious assumptions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WileEcoyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #363
387. We tend to forget how Conservative much of the U.S. is.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 06:47 PM by WileEcoyote
Granted, Conservatism is a failure however this doesn't mean that people can see it for the failure that it is.

Like Blanche Lincoln, Bill Clinton is from Arkansas. Hardly the most liberal Democrat around, but can you imagine how awful things would have turned had George Bush Senior served out his second (Presidential) term?


Thus Lincoln is an improvement over the GOP candidate running against her in the fall. Obama sees this as does his staff. They are not Conservatives but are trying to deal with the possible as opposed to the impossible. A progressive candidate winning in the general election in Arkansas is probably impossible. See what kind of odds Las Vegas gives you.

So i really don't have a problem with the White House pointing out the obvious.

The rest of you seem to be forming a circular firing squad...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PADemD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
350. That's $10 million that Blanche will not receive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueDemKev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #350
351. It's also $10 million that can't be used against Pat Toomey
Have you thought about that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #351
365. Sending a message was worth $100 million. More.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Admiral Loinpresser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #365
372. What you said!
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:43 PM
Response to Original message
356. Zorra to WH official: Maybe you need to learn a lesson from this, you corparasite POS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 02:44 PM
Response to Original message
357. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
367. Fuck him. Standing up for your principles is never a wasted effort.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 03:27 PM by Zhade
He should be listening, but he doesn't care.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
368. When is big labor going to figure out the Dems aren't their friends either...
Just look at the Obama Admin...

Hell, Obama was trained by Harvard Law, the MAJOR defender of rich, white privilege and the status-quo...

And he was a middle-of-the-roader there!

Why the surprise...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
376. really starting to hate this fucking white house
peice of shit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mariawr Donating Member (171 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
381. I know the RRW likes to start rumors but
..did I read the Gibbs opined that the money could have been better spent?
If he did say this, then this is one rumor (unnamed sources tick me off) w/ legs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicalmajority Donating Member (78 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
384. OBAMA SHOULD FIRE RAHM AND APPOINT HOWARD DEAN AS WH CHIEF OF STAFF
If not, Howard Dean can replace Obama in 2012.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
386. What I hear here is Rahm pushing us to the fringes. I for one will
continue to withhold my donations from the party and give to the individuals. Sick of the corporate suck up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #386
388. Obama is right. The funding of Lincoln's opponent was shameful and wasteful.
Edited on Wed Jun-09-10 06:55 PM by robcon
It was a power grab by some unions, and had nothing to do with policies, union support or winning an election.

Lincoln's and Halter's political beliefs are identical.

Fortunately, the power grab/intended intimidation didn't work, although it probably weakened the Democratic party's chances of holding on to the senate seat in Arkansas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
389. Well, if this quote is true, then I obviously flushed my 2008 presidential vote down the toilet.
I won't make that mistake again.

sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #389
391. Sad to hear you're abandoning Obama.
He's one of the best ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:21 PM
Response to Reply #391
392. this is the best we can expect?
that only confirms i need to find someone who deserves my vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #391
395. One of the best at what? Best at bamboozling people into thinking that he was on their side?
He's not bad, I'll grant you that. Although Bubba did it with more elan and flair.

No matter. I understand quite well that our country is a plutocracy, and our Federal government is nothing but the consigliere of Big Business. The president is just a front man for the ongoing imperialist/capitalist project of controlling the world's wealth, and siphoning it into the pockets of the already wealthy and powerful.

As Emma Goldman said so well and succinctly: "If voting actually changed anything, they'd make it illegal."

sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tqla Donating Member (104 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #395
396. Everybodies believing an "anonymous" statement from a blog on Politico?
How 'bout we wait and see who said it, or if it's even true? Boy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #396
398. seems to me the White House now had a whole day to deny it ..did they?
and do you honestly..really honestly think the AFL-CIO would reply to a comment like this only on the word of Politico?? ..Do you think they are bat shit crazy to make such a reply with their membership like that? Think again!

There is bat shit crazy..but it is not the AFL-CIO !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-10-10 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #398
409. They no only didn't deny it, they confirmed it.
Robert Gibbs: "I don't think that the President would necessarily agree with that characterization made by somebody here. I think we would certainly agree that we are likely to have very close elections in very many places throughout the country in November. And while the President might not have agreed with the exact characterization, I think that whether or not that money might have been better spent in the fall on closer elections between somebody -- between people who cared about an agenda that benefited working families and those that didn't, that money might come in more handy then.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/robert-gibbs...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Divine Discontent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #391
397. one of the best??? hardly. and anyone saying that 18 months in should be questioned.
I know you've made a good dozen posts supporting the WH in this thread, and I understand some people just adore no matter what mistakes are made - unfortunately the rest of us live & breathe, and we appreciate the good that's done by the WH, and are none to happy about the questionable decisions and comments they've made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
399. How much $$ did Organized Labor flush away in helping to elect Obama? eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
400. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
savalez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-20-10 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #400
410. Yikes.
Edited on Sun Jun-20-10 09:25 PM by savalez
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC