Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Lecture to "the left" from an Obama spokesperson, one named as possible DNC chair.

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 08:54 PM
Original message
Lecture to "the left" from an Obama spokesperson, one named as possible DNC chair.
Okay, this is just too much for me to take in. There is the assumption that anyone who questions anything at all is just too effing "left" to know anything at all. I despise that assumption. It is annoying and frustrating....and very very obvious.

When I came to DU in 2002 I was one of the most moderate center type people here, and I often got mocked for it. Now I am often said to be too lefty, liberal, fringe.

I'm not, you know. It's just that I question.

So now we have Howard Dean, a centrist, but a populist one....stepping down as chair and receiving absolutely no damn credit at all. His name is never ever mentioned by insider big deal Democrats now.

And now Steve Hildebrand is being mentioned as possible chair along with Paul Tewes....so he decides "the left" needs a lecture.

A Message to Obama's Progressive Critics

The point I'm making here is that our new President, the Congress and all Americans must come together to solve these problems. This is not a time for the left wing of our Party to draw conclusions about the Cabinet and White House appointments that President-Elect Obama is making. Some believe the appointments generally aren't progressive enough. Having worked with former Senator Obama for the last two years, I can tell you, that isn't the way he thinks and it's not likely the way he will lead. The problems I mentioned above and the many I didn't, suggest that our President surround himself with the most qualified people to address these challenges. After all, he was elected to be the President of all the people - not just those on the left.


Oh, gee, Steve...I thought he was elected just for me and my needs. :sarcasm:

Seriously, though, Steve. We kind of got the message when Rahm was picked even before election day to be Obama's gatekeeper.

David Sirota had a reaction to this as well.

Mandate Watch: Were Democrats Elected to Attack "The Left?" Part II

First thing's first: I absolutely agree with Hildebrand that you can't draw concrete conclusions about Obama based only on his personnel decisions - and I've written that repeatedly (and I've also said that most of Obama's policy declarations have been pretty progressive). However, Hildebrand implying that those personnel decisions really don't matter at all is straight up silly. It supposes that all the enormous egos that populate a White House are just mindless functionaries, and that even though those egos are heading major federal departments or are key advisers, they have no hand in making policy and/or their advice to a president makes absolutely no impact. Please - let's get real.

But far more important than that is Hildebrand firing up the whaaaaaaaambulance to whine and cry and moan about "the left." Really, what is with top Democrats explicitly attacking "the left wing of the Democratic Party" in Fox News-style talking points? Why is every substantive, non-partisan, non-ideological question of pragmatism from progressives almost automatically portrayed as some sort of super-Trotsky-ite, ideological and wholly inappropriate demand for Obama to be a president "just for those on the left?" Can anyone even ask a non-ideological question of Obama without being attacked as some sort of raving left-wing lunatic?


Amen, David.

The Democrats soundly attacked "the left" last year, when the voted to sanction Move On of its Petraeus ad

The House on Wednesday overwhelmingly voted to condemn the liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org for a recent advertisement attacking the top U.S. general in Iraq.

By a 341-79 vote, the House passed a resolution praising the patriotism Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and condemning a MoveOn.org ad that referred to Petraeus as "General Betray Us."


Will Marshall has lectured us over and over from his perch at the lefty DLC/PPI.

Polarize this

"Since the 2004 election, wealthy liberals, lefty bloggers, and interest groups have been demanding that Democrats reciprocate their opponents' belligerent partisanship. Only by standing up for core liberal convictions, they argue, can Democrats galvanize a new progressive majority and "take America back." It sounds stirring, but there are three problems with that theory.

First, most 2006 voters expressed a strong preference for cooperation over partisan confrontation between Bush and the Democratic Congress. Second, in moderate America, there simply aren't enough liberals to get Democrats anywhere near a majority. Third, liberal and centrist Democrats sometimes interpret their party's core principles differently
, especially on such important issues as the use of force, the benefits of trade, the role of government, and questions about religion and morality."


Since the election of Obama, the centrists have sent out their cowardly anonymous sources to attack one of the most centrist of Democrats who governed to the right as a governor...but who helped us take our party back.

Hit pieces started at once.

Mr. Dean certainly had a liberal fan club pushing for him. A medical doctor by training, he burst onto the presidential scene in 2004 on the strength of his "universal health care" plan as governor of Vermont. The militant Netroots crowd -- which he was among the first Democrats to cultivate -- has remained loyal and has been howling for his appointment. Some left-wing Democrats also felt he deserved the job as payment for the electoral victories he oversaw as head of the DNC.

Back in reality, however, Mr. Obama was having none of it. Plenty of top Democrats were fine with letting Mr. Dean run the DNC. His attack-dog style and Internet savvy were well suited to a job that was focused on winning elections. But his personal aggressiveness couldn't be more at odds with Mr. Obama's cool demeanor. And putting Mr. Dean in control of one of Mr. Obama's most cherished initiatives (health care) would've made John McCain's Sarah Palin pick look safe


That was from the Wall Street Journal, there were two others as well. Anonymous cowards.

And now Steve, who is being mentioned as the new chairman lectures "the left."

I am beginning to think that Sirota was right. The Democrats are in office and feel they have a mandate to attack "the left."

Call me Debbie Downer, but note what I say. If you speak out, you will be called "the left". Not in a nice way, in a negative way.











Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
1. My God, if the left is not appreciated and celebrated now - WHEN?!?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #1
279. One word "divide". To divide us...
MSM still has an election going on. Because this is the Democratic party that voted for Obama, and nothing else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 08:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. From the comments in Sirota's blog at Open Left. Oh yeh.
"That the Dean Revolution is unfinished. The center-right folks who ran this party and this country back into the ground are returning via the Obama Administration and their prime task is to ensure that we on the left do not undermine their power or their policy goals.

The scary thing is that they may have figured out the best way to beat us - by building a movement that defines itself by loyalty to a leader, not by citizen activism to change the basic policies and assumptions of the country.

They basically feel they can run the party and the country as was done in the 1990s with impunity"

And someone else mentioned that Steve's being so close to Obama and part of his campaign is doing this lecture with Obama's blessing.

Fed up.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
191. Loyalty to a leader!!
That's it. And that's why DU has been so shall we say, goddamn creepy since Obama won. Forget what HE DOES. Forget WHO he appoints. He is OUR LEADER and no doubt a good guy so who are we but BAD DEMOCRATS to dare criticize our DEAR LEADER.

Creepy cult of personality. I didn't like it with Hillary or Al Gore or Edwards-or anyone. They work for us. They are not GODS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sce56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #191
276. I'm with you on that one!


My type of generator
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #191
282. What is creepy to me is how unwilling some people here are to give him half a chance.
It's not surprising though, considering that many of these people fought hard against him in the primary -- so they were primed to continue their negativity now.

Here's what I believe about Obama. He's nothing like Bush. He won't be a puppet President, led around by his Cabinet. He's going to be telling them what his policies are, not the other way around. So what if a Cabinet member is a centrist? If the person is competent, s/he will be able to carry out the policies Obama sets, even if they are more progressive than the policies this person has carried out before.

And people who try to undermine Obama won't last long in his Administration.

I might be wrong. Or the people who distrust him now might be wrong. But it seems fairer to keep an open mind when we haven't even seen his Administration in action yet for a single day, much less a month or a year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #282
290. hope you're right. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #282
334. We supported him in the primaries...still do. But the references to "the left"
need to stop. We are part of the party. We are the ones who fought so hard to get him elected.

Those on the inside need to be careful with their words.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LooseWilly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #334
356. I personally think the "centrist/right" Dems just can't help themselves...
They attack the "left" out of knee-jerk habit. They got so beat up for being hippies and whatnot in the day... or in some cases they just grew up hearing it.
Whatever.
In many cases it seems to be rhetoric meant to be consumed by those on the right, to undercut any attempts at creating a rallying cry for the base on the right.

In any case, I think Obama himself, if not quite all the staff he's picking, knows the fate of a Dem who decides to ignore the left.
He's appointed a reminder to Secretary of State.
I'm still convinced that Hillary lost the primary because she ignored the left to court the center and right-of-center. And she did it not just in words, but in actions (I'm thinking of her multitude of corporate ties, her courting of companies that actively try to headhunt jobs to overseas employees, not to mention her vote on the declaration of the Iranian Quds Forces as a terrorist organization despite the fact that its state affiliation makes that declaration non-sensical).
Obama, on the other hand, has yet to actually DO anything to ruffle feathers on the left (with the exception of caving on the telecom immunity bit... which I admit is cause for a bit of vigilance).

I say give him a chance to show what he's going to do. His appointments to the Cabinet and so on, may reflect some centrism in terms of leanings/campaigning, but they also reflect COMPETENCE, which I think is Obama's main thrust at the moment.

As long as they're competent at the posts that Obama hires them for, I'll give Obama a chance to teach them not to be foolish enough to keep trying to talk down to those of us on the left.
As I said before, old habits die hard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #282
336. this is "a chance"
What we give elected representatives a "chance" to do, is a chance to listen and be influenced. That is how a representative democracy works. The reason there is so much debate this early is because Obama is moving extraordinarily quickly to name cabinet picks.

We are not required to "trust" elected officials. In fact, it is our moral responsibility and civic duty to do hold them to account.

We do not live under one man rule, and should not look at the administration as though we do. It matters not how wonderful the one individual is.

Had Lincoln appointed pro-slavery people to his cabinet, there would have been a minority - the Abolitionists - objecting to that. As Obama appoints corporatists and free-marketeers to his cabinet, there is going to be a minority objecting to that. That is how politics works.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-11-08 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #282
373. I supported Obama in the primaries and I gave him my vote
not a blank check.

Maybe I have more confidence in him than you do but he seems to me perfectly capable of taking criticism and dealing with it constructively and effectively.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pmorlan1 Donating Member (763 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #191
301. I agree
I agree with you and the original poster. I'm really tired of all the attacks against anyone that dares to question. It reminds me of the Bushies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #191
310. This doesn't begin or end at DU --
Edited on Tue Dec-09-08 10:33 AM by defendandprotect
these concerns are out there among all liberals/progressives --

LABOR and huge anti-war sentiments --

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=14A56161-18...

Lose LABOR --???

Wanting unions is now problematically "lefty" -- ?

It takes a lot of votes to beat GOP election stealing --

and they'll be a new election in two years --

Pretty dumb of anyone working for Obama to try to toss liberals/progressives

overboard, unless you're actually looking to put government back in GOP hands.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dragonfli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
4. Just WHO THE HELL do they think made up that super-donation machine?
WHO THE HELL do they think went a-marching, State to State to knock on doors? Just WHO THE HELL do they think was at the phones Nationwide?

Public Opinion Giveth
Public Opinion Taketh Away
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frisbee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 08:56 PM
Response to Reply #4
250. They may be in for a very rude awakening...
when those same people have a hard time getting so fired up and putting in the long hours and money they really can't afford when the 2012 campaigns get rolling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 09:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
255. We give it, but we can take it away if they start with the centrist bs again
The centrists, the DLCers, etc. need to know we want nothing that even remotely smells of right wing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #255
321. You would be that stupid?
Do you prefer unjust war, millions murdered in Iraq? Millions here without health insurance? No more jobs here? Banks do what they damn well please? YOu'd be that stupid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sarah Ibarruri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #321
353. Excuse me but what are you talking about? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 02:14 AM
Response to Reply #4
284. Millions and millions of individuals, who don't march in lockstep. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 02:17 AM
Response to Reply #4
285. Interestingly, people making over $200 K a year voted for
Obama by a margin of 6%. The highly educated also voted for him by a wide margin.

It was uneducated people and Southerners who gave McCain most of his votes.

So huge numbers of people voted for Obama, from all walks of life -- except in the South.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
humbled_opinion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #285
341. Exactly.
So explain why that Margin of the "RICH" would have a problem with Obama doing as he campiagned to do by rolling back thier excessive tax breaks Bush gave them.

They wouldn't. So why is he?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
5. Nominated.
This fellow is playing games. The progressive left isn't demanding to run the whole show. We just want to be seated at the table, the same as everyone else. And we aren't going to be fooled into forgetting that we helped set that table.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. It's pretty astounding that we should even have to think about it...
...after working so hard to get this guy elected ~ I hope we have some damn good news this week!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:23 PM
Response to Original message
7. All of these are alarming, but the WSJ is despicable
" And putting Mr. Dean in control of one of Mr. Obama's most cherished initiatives (health care) would've made John McCain's Sarah Palin pick look safe"

In addition to buying every Dean stereotype, they forget that Dean, then a moderate Governor from Vt and a doctor, was one of the people who worked with HRC in 1993. Unless that was a different Dr. Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
344. Dean was incredibly effective. That is why the WSJ does not like him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
8. Welcome news!
It sure seems to me that PE Obama knows exactly what he is doing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. What's welcome news??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. That PE Obama may tap this Steve Hildebrand fellow as DNC Chair.
From the OP, he looks like a guy who has his head on straight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. imo he looks like a guy with his head up his ass. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. A welcome improvement from the current chairman nonetheless.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. We wouldn't be sitting on this win without Howard Dean - Obama ran using his model...
...and Dean's 50-state strategy is excellent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Water under the bridge as far as I'm concerned.
Its all in the past, as is Governor Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. What could you possibly have against Dean??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
30. I see..
so use his strategy and his supporters to win the election, then throw them all under the bus after you've won and go back to the 90s style Republican-Lite politicking that LOST us election after election.

Genius.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. You have it exactly right. Thanks for saying it.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #30
37. There is a reason that Rahm Emanuel will be White House Chief of Staff, and Mr. Dean
will be on the outside looking in.

And judging from that, PE Obama may think differently than you do as to whose strategy it was that has brought in the recent Democratic success.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Yes, there is a reason.
If Mr. Dean is on the outside looking in, as you so smugly say...(by the way smugness is being quite common here.)then I will be on the outside as well.

Rahm is there because Obama sent a statement to the wing of the party that has fought so hard for him.

The statement is back off, you won't be needed for a while.

:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #41
45. Or maybe he chose a bully like Rahm to help him ram a progressive agenda...
...through Congress ~ that's what I'm hoping.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. Uh oh
You used Rahm and Progressive in the same sentence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. oops :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anaxarchos Donating Member (963 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #30
127. There is a lot...
...of very good company under that bus. All in all, it is not such a bad place to start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #23
232. WTF. Do you agree that Dean was a huge help in getting Obama into the presidency?
Water under the bridge? What does that mean? You sound like a republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Downtown Hound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #23
333. Wow. That's pretty ignorant.
I'm a radical lefty that for the most part hasn't been too outraged over Obama's picks. They're pretty much what I expected from him, and I also see the need to at least play the politics game a little bit. But what you just said about Dean, allow me to shake my head in disgust. And no, it's not because you insulted a hero of mine. It's because your ignorance is something that needs to be squashed right now.

To dismiss Dean or what he has done for the party is to invite a repeat of what happened to the Democrats in the 90's, when they eschewed ideas for play it safe politics. They basically didn't even make an effort to win any red states. They never took a principled stance on anything, or opposed things that needed opposing. For that, we got a Republican congress, an embarrassing impeachment scandal, and then Bush.

That is until, Dean came along and changed all of that. He said no way are we going to just let the Republicans have these states. No, we don't have to go along with illegal and immoral wars just to win elections. By doing so he changed American politics, and America.

You disagree with the OP? Fine, but don't let these lessons be lost on you or the Democratic Party as a whole, or we will not find ourselves in power for very long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #19
28. wrong
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #19
31. That's just ugly and divisive as hell.
And that's about all there ever is at DU right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #31
240. But what you said about Mr. Hildebrand, the man who at the time
you believed to be under consideration by PE Obama to be DNC Chair was not divisive?

Hypocrisy much?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #240
268. I criticized Hildebrand's words. You are criticizing a man
who in part brought us two great wins in the row.

Big huge difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rvablue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:21 PM
Response to Reply #19
146. Really, "an improvement from the current chairman" you mean the one
who saved the party, created the 50 state strategy, won back the Congress and helped Obama win the White House....that guy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #146
242. The gentleman who I assign a greater degree of credit to those accomplishments
was chosen by PE Obama to be his Chief of Staff.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #242
248. Is that you Rahm?
It's only the DLC Dinos who won't give Howard Dean any credit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
I Have A Dream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #248
251. I thought the exact same thing... "Is that you, Rahm?"
:eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #248
259. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
rvablue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 12:22 AM
Response to Reply #248
277. I'm the poster above the one you responded to
yeah, it's BS that Dean has gotten little credit or kudos and while I am no defender of the DLC, I think it has more to do with jealousy than allegiance to any organization...it's not as if we've seen Kucinich out praising Dean...no one has and it is unfair and it sucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #242
258. Hey, read this about the harm Rahm did in Florida. We lost a seat this time.
Because he interfered. And the ones he picks are afraid to speak out, afraid of their shadows.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #19
174. are you smoking pcp?
you must be one of those DLc cheerleaders...

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #19
185. You got lost on your way to Free Republic
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tritsofme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #185
243. 5 years and counting.
Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carnie_sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-09-08 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #243
342. So why exactly
is Dr. Dean such a bad party chairman? I haven't seen you offer a single reason for this bizarre assertion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
234. How can you improve on success? Dean, who I don't consider "the left" was a tremendous help
in the Obama win. Also us on the left gave a lot of blood, sweat and tears. Rahm Emanuel is a slap in our face. The DLC are as bad as republicans.

And by the way, putting your "nt" in the message is not very helpful. Put it in the SUBJECT so people don't have to look in your message.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #12
143. No way. The OP neglected to add that Hildebrand unequivocably turned down the job weeks ago.
Edited on Mon Dec-08-08 01:14 PM by ClarkUSA
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #143
159. I did not neglect, I did not know. There's a big difference.
I did a search before I posted it, a search on his name. His refusal to take the chair did not show up.

Could you link to it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #143
160. But he was considered. That is what my OP said.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #12
171. Based on Mr. Hildebrand's attack on his part of the base of the party
it would seem he has no business heading the DNC.

Or are progressives supposed to be treated like the religious right are treated in the Republican party.

The difference is that the progressives haven't been consistently and unapologetically wrong about everything.

Progressives don't deserve the disdain they've been shown of late.

Regards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #171
186. Well said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
9. the Left IS "all the people"
Only the right wingers think otherwise.

Those of us on the Left are not trying to get something for ourselves. It is false and humiliating to be treated as though we were.

Being on the Left means advocating for what is best for all of the people.

There is no spinning this as kinda sorta liberal or progressive, and there is no justification for claiming that people thinking this way will ever do anything but move the party to the right. Portraying the Left as just another selfish special interest group, and one of no serious consequence, is the right wing point of view, period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #9
63. Very well said.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. We have our fringe, too.
The left is not monolithic.

For example, some of our further-out people would insist that we stop all airplane traffic (to eliminate "chem trails"), make gasoline illegal (to stop "peak oil"), and should hold kangaroo-court tribunals (everything from GTMO critics to 9/11-truthers).

The variance in the left is easy to see here, on DU, with the vigorous debates we have on everything from childhood immunizations to proper party conduct with cardboard cut-outs.

Yes, there is a portion of the left who should have voices at the table, but meeting their demands wouldn't always be sound governance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lostnotforgotten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. "kangaroo-court tribunals" - No We Want Honest Trials To Put Bush And Cheney Away For Life
Does that make me a leftist - then so be it.

I was taught that we are a nation of laws.

I guess that is a leftist position.

So you are implying that the Banana Republic style of government practiced under Bush will continue under Obama.

As a leftist you can go .... yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #15
51. Trials with pre-determined outcomes are not fair.
By definition.

Thank you for proving my point.

If there *was* evidence of crimes that *could* put the resident (and his VP) away, by all means, lets see whether or not he'd be found prosecutable, and possibly guilty.

However, assuming guilt *without* a trial is not a nation of laws. It's witch-hunting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lostnotforgotten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #51
54. What Part Of Honest Trials Did you Not Read - You Obviously Need Glasses!
We all know that an honest trial would convict these bastards without a problem~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #54
57. If you *know*, then there you go.
Have you heard the defense arguments?

Mitigating circumstances?

Actual charges decided upon?

Heck, do we even have a venue/court system set of rules (if we don't know the charges are?)

If we could just "know" who was guilty without a trial, then we wouldn't need trials.

FWIW, last time I poked deeply into this (talking to actual prosecutors, not internet "prosecutors"), there wasn't much that could be done, because while there was plenty of evidence that they were stupid, callous, shifty, and prone to totally fucking things up, none of those things are actual crimes. The "crimes" often alleged to, while henious, need more than opinion behind them, they need evidence of actual law-breaking, with the resident and vice being directly involved or reasonably culpable.

So, under what court, and what laws, do you think they could be charged?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lostnotforgotten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #57
58. Ah Well - You Are A Lost Cause!
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #57
69. we are not on any jury
We have the right to suspect government officials of wrong doing.

Evidence of law breaking by Bush administration officials is abundant, and publicly available. Hell, they have bragged about some of it.

By your standards, no crime could ever be investigated and pursued, because we must know that a person is guilty before we can talk about it, and if no one talks about it there will be no proceedings (this is a representative democracy, after all, driven by the national political discussion) and proceedings are the only way to know with certainty who is guilty of what.

But you have not shared your opinion. Do you, or do you not think that officials in the Bush administration have been engaged in criminal activity? Just your best guess. Your hunch.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boppers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #69
79. Maybe we're lookiing at different evidence?
We already have seen convictions for actual wrong-doing in *the administration*, but that's not the same as finding the *resident and VP being culpable of criminal activity themselves.

Let's take oh, for example, Plame. Somebody was already convicted for having an illegal *role* in how this was handled, but what legal theory would allow the top-two to be convicted of committing an actual crime? Even if * took the stand, and said that he himself personally called all the media, and all the foreign ministers, and mentioned to them that Plame worked for the CIA, he still has a reasonable defense that he didn't *know* he was outing an operative, or breaking up an operation. Thus, while he may have done something stupid, there's no mens rea. Of course, since this never got as far as his desk, we can't place the blame that high.

Do you know of some evidence that would reasonably lead to an actual indictment and conviction of */VP themselves, and know exactly what law(s) we are talking about violating? Certainly their aides and staff can (and have) been held culpable, but something the two of them can be charged with?

Yes, we can *talk* about actions of the organization pushing the boundaries of criminality, but assigning the blame to two specific people is a different matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #79
126. the most secretive administration in history
We have the most secretive administration in history. That in itself is a "smoking gun."

I have not said that any investigation should be restricted to, or primarily focused on"two specific people." On the other hand, it would be foolish to ignore or deny the chronic pattern of low level scapegoats being thrown to the wolves while higher-ups walk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconicgnom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #79
264. Just... give it a break. W and co. ignore subpoenas, "lose" e-mails, etc. etc.
So why don't you just fe fe fe fade away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bette Noir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #57
269. 1. Torture is and always has been illegal.
2. Simulated drowning is and always has been torture.
3. The administration admits to having "waterboarded" prisoners.

Is the math too difficult for you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Two Americas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #51
68. don't be absurd
No one has the power here, nor are they advocating that I have seen, any sort of abrogation of due process rights for anyone accused of crimes.

We have every right to express our belief that someone is guilty of a crime, as citizens. There is a procedure in place to protect the accused from jurors who have already made up their minds about a case.

Witch hunts - no one is talking about witch hunts. The only witch hunts I have seen have been directed at dissenters and those calling for bringing the elected officials to justice. "Bring to justice" - calling for investigations and trials as appropriate and demanding justice - is not a "witch hunt" nor is it denying any rights to the accused.

The protections in place for the citizens are there to protect the people from their government, not to protect the government from the people.

This is what the Republicans have been trying to sell us for the last 30 years - that the Constitution and legal system exist solely for the protection of the wealthy and powerful FROM the people rather than the other way around. That is a perversion of the fundamental theories of government upon which the country was founded.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #51
97. a prosecutor does NOT presume innocence.
and it's not a pre-determined outcome, it's a hope. it is perfectly acceptable for me to assume/hope for/expect a guilty verdict, if i believe the evidence will take us there . what the court does is another matter. the court must presume innocence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-08-08 09:19 PM
Response to Reply #15
257. "Innocent Until Proven Guilty by a jury of your peers"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-07-08 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #10
25. childh'd immunizations? that shows a non-monolithic left? do folks even know what 'left' means?
i doubt it

otherwise....totally agree with the OP
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top