It’s Poker, they, the Dems are the house.

Odds in our favor, not so good. We The People, Lose

I’m not saying this would be unlike the current crop of Scyphozoan Democrats but the source is Politico. I’d sooner believe the Enquirer.

Well, Obama and the Dems have thrown another fight.

Figured them out yet?

Time to join the Green Party and quit wasting your time on these corrupt quislings. They can only be counted on to sabotage any chances for Progressive/Liberal success.

And now we see what Obama and his corporatist Blue Dog and Senate conservadem allies will fight for.

Will they fight for the public option? No.

Will they fight for the repeal of DADT? No.

Will they fight for a stimulus that would have been big enough to actually add jobs to our economy? No.

Will they fight for a Supreme Court nominee that will keep the court from lurching ever rightward? No.

Will they fight for a meaningful cleanup of the Augean Stables that Bush left behind at DoJ? No.

Will they fight for the EFCA? No.

Will they fight for Congressional ratification of the pretty-words treaty signed by America and Russia last week? Don’t get your hopes up.

Will they fight to pass a health care bill that was written by a WellPoint VP and which is similar to both Mitt Romney’s failing Massachusetts plan and what the conservative business-worshiping Heritage Foundation recommended earlier this decade? You bet they will!

They’ll also fight to keep progressives and the base of the Democratic Party marginalized.

Lovely, except the Greens are in large part paid for by the GOP. I’d rather find a party they don’t finance, thanks.

With the cost of running for office — any office — mounting ever-higher, public financing is our only hope. And Citizens United may have wrecked that.

I have heard rumors about this from elsewhere

Greens are in large part paid for by the GOP

Can you hear the sound PW?

That swooshing sound as they’re siphoning from the edges …

You’re making the assumption, of course, that there are any progressives in the Democratic party.

And you’re assuming the Democratic party will do anything other than continue to push America on its plutocratic death-march.

Not leaving themselves the option to pass a reconciliation bill with a simple majority in the Senate means Congressional Democrats have actively decided to give the 41 members of the Republican Senate Caucus a veto over every single bill going forward.

[...]

If there is no budget resolution and Democrats complain about Republicans “blocking” a promise to the progressives base, remember: Democrats chose to give Republicans their veto power.

Absolutely right.

In just the same way that, and so long as, the Senate Democratic Majority under Harry Reid continues to choose to impose supermajority 60-vote rule on the Senate in lieu of (and apparently for fear of) forcing the Republican minority (or anyone else) to actually physically filibuster in public any measures which that minority strongly opposes.

If not, all the Congressional Democrats should just stay home where they can spend more time with their families…

…and do considerably less damage to the nation.

If you will read my posts on this subject last week, you will see I mentioned that the budgets are usually late. Way late. Many times not until February of the following year.

So, this is not only believable, but quite normal. It is rare that any budget is done before Oct. 1. So, the Politico story is actually not news.

Since the Congress will change after November, the one time reconciliation chance has happened and passed, and it is done. Well, until the GOP use it for some major policy change in the future now that Democrats have shown the way.

One can only hope that they change the filibuster rule before Nov. so that the GOP can take advantage of that too next year.

It is going to be an interesting 6 months.

Dem’s must return to trying to actually find common ground–much as they dislike it.

A non-binding resolution is about as meaningful as a bag of wind.

So all the Pukes have to do to turn away your support from a party is to donate money to it? That’s all it takes?

Of course there will be some individual races where the Pukes will support the Greens to take away some support from the Dems. I don’t think it makes any sense to give the Pukes so much power over us, that they can decide for us which parties we will support simply by donating.

We liberals need to rally around some alternative party, because if we simply stop voting the Villagers will say it was because Obama went too far left. We have to stand up and make a statement to the Rats. If there is a Progressive party for us to support then that would be fine, otherwise I think we have little choice but to vote Green.

If we form a new Progressive Party and the Pukes donate to it will you stop supporting it?

It is spitting in the face of everyone who voted for Democrats expecting the legislative changes that they promised to enact.

The American people sent 59 Democrats to the US Senate. Why should anyone bother making financial contributions and/or voting for Democrats if Democrats are unwilling to use the power they are given?

I used to contribute to the DNC, the DCCC, the DSCC and Democratic candidates. Now I just send back those business reply envelops with nothing more than some of the paper they mailed to me.

This would be yet again where the Democrats use Republicans for cover. By not doing this and blaming the Republicans, the Democrats can yet again dodge the Public Option and drug re-importation. The Democrats hate reconciliation because then they have to answer really tough questions and say really moonbat things to attempt to explain away their votes (like how we had Democrats give crazy explanations for no PO in HCR and had the various Democrats take on the role of pretending to be in opposition).

If there were such a thing as nutritional labeling for “news,” this one would be labeled 100% FACT FREE!“

Isn’t Politico just a sort of imposter webzine…an imprimatur for the GOP, like Fox but without the cult of personalities?

Not trying to defend the Dems but might as well give Palin credit for her scientific mind if we are going to follow this lead down the rabbit hole.

Because Republicans would never ever infiltrate the D party, no no. (Arlen Specter, Blanche Lincoln, Joe Lieberman Blue Dogs, Rahm Emmanuel, many big donors who lobby/ contribute to both D’s and R’s.)

But there are actual Greens who refuse to accept the normal campaign contribution route.

Furthermore, on the face of the link PW provided… the very first thing the article says is an actual good guy ended up benefitting from the goper cash by getting on the ballot. Second.. if republicans see opportunity inside an occasional Green weak spot to be a spoiler… then it should be clear it is a huge opportunity for the left to do the same.

article says is an actual good guy ended up benefitting from the goper cash

Now wouldn’t that be a hoot, seeing a Green Candidate best their person, with their money.

If there is no budget resolution and Democrats complain about Republicans “blocking” a promise to the progressives base, remember: Democrats chose to give Republican their veto power.

This needs to hammered home.

Because I guarandamntee you that’s EXACTLY what they’re hoping for, and they’ll have all kinds of apologists posting on the toobz and speaking on the teevee saying that same thing.

Hammer them. Often. You can’t blame Republicans for obstructionism when you CHOOSE to give them the power to obstruct.

Period.

Another EXCELLENT article Jon.

Best site on the toobz. Right here, right now. Bar none.

Sure wish I was rich so I could fund you guys better.

As far as I know, a few veteran reporters from the Washington Post–not Times–founded Politico.

Besides. the story is true. Budgets are never done on time, almost always after October. Which is not good for many reasons. You may recall that the 2009 budget was not done until February of 2009, or might even have been march.

As mentioned, reconciliation may be the best tool for progressives, but that automatically makes it the best tool of regressives.

So, I hope there won’t be any complaining when your “child” comes back to wreck havoc on your house in the future.

Aside from all that, Dem’s are now smarting from the pox put on them from this last time of using reconciliation. They are not eager to use it again any time soon and give the GOP a 2/3 veto proof majority come November.

Kyledeb has a fresh cross-post available: Will Sen. Scott Brown Meet With Massachusetts Immigrant Youth Before April 17?

So to hell with the Democrats then. They’re useless as a political party. The Greens, the Progressives, the WFPers, those are where we on the left should be turning in organizing to pass progressive reforms. The Democrats only stifle reform.

What are you talking about? What pox? Democrats aren’t suffering from being too antagonistic to Repugs. They’re suffering for being too accomodating and negotiating against themselves.

The irony, of course, is all of the kossacks and the HuffPo Obama Cheerleading Brigade were all assuring me that this second round of reconciliation would be used to add a public option back in to health care reform.

It’s all Obama’s 11-dimensional chess, they assured me. Apparently, he’s not even good at playing 2-dimensional checkers, let alone 11-dimensional chess…

LOL exactly. It’s become almost a past-time of mine to see the next twist in the Obamabot pretzel to explain away all of his betrayals of his platform.

One can only hope that they change the filibuster rule before Nov. so that the GOP can take advantage of that too next year.

Don’t fall for that one, cregan.

There’s neither a “filibuster rule” nor any rule that needs to be “changed” for the Democratic majority to insist on a return to real filibusters, and thus a return to simple-majority rule in the Senate. [Which, no doubt, a slim Republican majority, as you anticipate, may well be more likely to implement before a Democratic majority will ever do so.] I can refer you to three working diary threads that back up that statement, if need be.

But, either way, I agree: “common ground” is indeed what all members of the House and Senate should be looking for, regardless of Party.

P.S. Serious Republican Party-linked (read: corporate) money is behind Politico, not the personal resources of their first prominent reporters pulled from other Washington media outlets. I think the couple who own or founded The Hill are primary movers and shakers behind that private agenda-driven publication.

P.P.S. Are you confusing the (usually-late) individual agency appropriations bills with the overall Congressional Budget Resolution (which isn’t signed by the President), that sometimes never gets done at all?

He’s plenty good at 11 dimensional chess, it’s just that you are his opponent.

The pox is that they didn’t get the big bump they had been told by Rahm they would get from passing the turkey called health care reform. Rather than being greeted as liberators with flowers they have been greeted with some other natural substance.

Democrats knuckle under to the Republicans and betray progressives? Naah — you’ve got to be joking.

Why except for when they failed to filibuster Alito, went along with the Iraq War, went along with the Patriot Act, went along with the Military Commissions Act, granted retroactive immunity to the telephone companies for helping the Bush Regime illegally wiretap Americans, submitted to Republicans on their threat to use the nuclear option to abolish the filibuster but failed to make the same threat when they attained the majority and a few thousand other things, I can’t think of a single time the Democrats knuckled under to the Republicans and betrayed progressives.

Are you sure you’re not thinking about some OTHER Democratic Party?

On the filibuster rule, I remember a county supervisor’s meeting one day in 2001 where a group was trying to defund another group because of politically incorrect statements they had made.

I warned them that the winds of opinion change and if they helped establish this principle, they might find their rule coming back and biting them.

Sure enough, a few months later 9/11 happened and this group found itself on the hot seat and denied funding for statements they made that didn’t fit with the atmosphere then.

I remember another time, standing on a corner downtown at a red light with no traffic. A person walked by me making some snide comment about me being stupid for waiting. As soon as they reached the other side, a motorcycle cop pulled up and gave them a jaywalking ticket.

I must say, I haven’t ever been happy at seeing someone get a ticket before, but that one sure tickled me.

Similarly, it is NOT speculation any more. When, in the future, the GOP has the two houses of Congress and the Presidency, which will happen sooner or later, they WILL use reconciliation to pass some major, nation changing legislation that they have wanted to pass for years. Democrats have shown the way, and will have no basis to complain.

Despite the spin, reconciliation had never been used to enact major, basic nation changing laws before. But, now, the door is wide open.

However, there is one silver lining for Democrats. If the public reaction to what the Dem’s did continues on the path it is now, and they see big reversals in Nov., the GOP may then think twice about using such a tactic in the future–seeing the results it brought the Dem’s.

Yes, all those budget related items are commonly late or not done.

The US reminds me of that scene from Pulp Fiction. Care to guess which one, anybody? :-)

But really, the bizarro-USA resembles parts of a Tarantino movie ever more with each passing day.

mixed in with a bit of direction from the Coens

battered wife syndrome

ding ding ding!

Excellent point. The progressives in the party are the opponent. I think this is why having a Democrat president is actually WORSE than having a Republican one. I never would have thought that, until now seeing Obama continue what Clinton started. I realize now (too late) that a Republican president who talks about war, privatizing social security, mandatory minimums, etc will get his hand smacked by the progressive community because that community will still have the media, many anti-Republican players and its own voice as the minority party to do it with. And the blue dogs, and conservadems will let the progressives lead that charge, because the dems are the minority party, and those blue dogs and conservadems want to fight against the majority. So, they find common cause with us. Temporarily.

When a democrat is in power, the greatest power he or she has is the ability to shut us up. Like no Republican can do when they are in power. Now that the dems get their majority status, the first they do is shut us down. Effectively.

What is the lsson learned? NEVER VOTE DEMOCRAT AGAIN. Let Palin have it in 2012. Here is our lesson — we want dems to see our leverage? They will beg for us to lead the charge against every thing she says while she is president. We have a better chance of stopping PResident Palin from destroying progressive values than we do of stopping President Obama from doing that.

By the time 2012 comes, we will realize that Obama has hurt us more than Bush ever did. That includes a highter body count of civilians in Afghanistan with even less chance of victory. Every topic we could name, we will see that Obama has only worsened and hastened the disaster that Bush started. Yet he has done so with our silence, unlike Bush. Because he CAN. Palin would never have such power over our dissent.

Let Palin have it in 2012. She is the lesser evil. As counterintuitive as that is, just think about the Clinton/OBama era vs. the Bush era. When were we more successful in stopping this plutocratic march? Clinton/OBama shut us down completely. At leaset we had a media platform and a willing party of dems behind us when Bush/Bush were in power….

Why do people insist forming another party is the answer? The only successful third-party movements in US history have been the GOPers(replacing the Whigs before the Civil War) and Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party. That’s a terrible record.

A better plan would be to take over the Democratic Party and run it to suit us. There is already a known structure and broad name recognition, which a third party wouldn’t have. If progressives simply gain the power to defeat any Dem they decide to, our power will increase a hundredfold. The Democratic Party establishment will have to learn to fear progressives before they will respect them and enact their policies. By investing in primary challenges to corporatist and Blue Dog Dems and defeating them, progressives stand to achieve a level of power not seen since 1972-80.

So no, jumping to the GOP financed Greens is not a viable solution – it only plays into GOPer hands by marginalizing otherwise liberal voters. Third parties have always been a losing proposition in the US and nothing has happened to change that fact. In fact, a look at the Greens in Canada is illustrative of what would happen in the US. In Canada, the Greens regularly poll at 8-10% nationally, yet they have never held a seat in Parliament and their Leader has never been elected to ANY office at all. If that 8-10% simply voted for either the Liberals or NDP, the Conservatives would be ousted and have zero chance of regaining power. Instead, the Greens vote for unelectable candidates and cause both Liberals and NDPers to lose seats to the Cons. Nice going, Greens, and thanks for nothing. Is that what you want to happen in the US – permanent GOP rule? Because that is what would happen. It’s smarter to increase our influence in the Democratic Party.

I would take your advice and apply to it to Congressional seats – house and senate. Let the Progressive reclaim a Progressive Congress. But as far as a white house bid — that is a very hard job to win going up against the party machine. I would rather have a republican we can all agree to oppose than a “Democrat” who will undermine us from within in the white house.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/12/upper-big-branch-mine-dis_n_534268.html

I just wanted to add another item, among hundreds, showing how OBama is no different than Bush, except he can shut us down better than Bush could. The hearings into mine safety will be just as secret under Obama as they were under a republican president. I don’t know how Obama defeated Hillary in the primaries. He appeares to be her husband under a different guise.

REmember, it was Clinton who tore down Glass-Steagal. Could a Republican have done that? Never in 67 years. Which is exactly how long it did take. And it was a Democrat who did it.

Could a Republican have mandated we purchase private “health” insurance with precious little change in how that product is regulated? Never in the history of this nation. Until a Democrat did it.

Now, there is bluster about the need to “reform” social security.

Remember when Bush tried to privatize it? Not allowed to happen. The Dems unanimously lined up to stop him.

When OBama does it – maybe in his 2nd term — who will stop him?

Progressives?

I laugh. We are like a dead movement walking when a Democrat is in the white house.

Despite the spin, reconciliation had never been used to enact major, basic nation changing laws before. But, now, the door is wide open.

And how, exactly, have the Democrats opened the door? If you are talking about the Health Insurance Reform bill, the vast majority of that was passed OUTSIDE of reconciliation — the Reconciliation bill simply tweeked the Senate bill that had passed by the standard 60-votes for cloture plus 51-votes for passage route.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/12/dawn-johnsens-usefulness_n_534100.html

what Bush started, Obama will continue. With lots of illusion to fool us into thinking otherwise.

Rachel Maddow has referred to William Jefferson Clinton as “the best Republican President ever!”

Traditionally, I would have agreed with you. But I increasingly see the Democratic Party as a bought-and-paid-for appendage of corporate America, the place where liberal and progressive impulses go to die a harmless death. I don’t care if it’s the Greens, the Socialists or what have you: as soon as a leftish third party gets going, I’m on board.

Agree with the observations mars

I find it interesting also to reflect back on the consolidation of the petroleum industry that was allowed under Hillary’s husband.

Don’t think it’s really working out all that well for us.

nah – second best, but close

Similarly, it is NOT speculation any more. When, in the future, the GOP has the two houses of Congress and the Presidency, which will happen sooner or later, they WILL use reconciliation to pass some major, nation changing legislation that they have wanted to pass for years. Democrats have shown the way, and will have no basis to complain.

Despite the spin, reconciliation had never been used to enact major, basic nation changing laws before. But, now, the door is wide open.

BS. R’s always do whatever the fuck they want. Whether or not Dems do it to is irrelevent. R’s will abolish the filibuster if they hit any speed bumps Dems put up – it doesn’t matter what Dems do.

The “take over the Democratic Party” tactic has been tried for years. It should be called the method for maintaining the status quo or continuing to choose “the lesser of two evils”. The only way we can break through this corporate hold on the two parties is to take a stand against it on principle. Since I have seen MANY actions from the so-called Democratic President which took former President George W. Bush’s actions to the next level, it doesn’t appear to matter which of the two current legacy parties is in power. Those who lose the most are the citizens of this country. Therefore, the citizens NEED a party which advocates for citizens first.

I agree that we need that kind of party, but (a) right now we don’t have one, and (b) until we do, we still have to take steps to mitigate the damage and the erosion of progressive victories obtained by FDR, LBJ and Kennedy.

So, while we work on forming such party, I would advocate that we stop being the playthings of the Democratic party. I will not cry if Palin wins (or any other republican), because that will force the Democrats to remember who we are. We are Progressives who will fight,and if the Dems will get out of our way and stop thwarting us, we can sometimes be very successful. Like I said – we were more successful in at least preserving the legacy of FDR and LBJ and Kennedy when a Republican was President than we have been when a Democrat was president.

REmember the Democrat controlled house and senate under Reagan? We at least got some good things going then. EIC was passed into the tax code. Dept of Education setup. No mandatory minimums were pushed through. IRan-Contra was exposed, and at least heads made to roll. Now, that will never even happen again (the scandal will, but the Congressional investigation will not).

Ha, yes.

But which scene from Pulp Fiction do you think I’m referring to?!

The point I would like to make is that as long as people have the “mindset” that our options are primarily Democrats or Republicans, we maintain the status quo. The majority of this country is not remotely being well represented by either the Democrats or Republicans. That majority needs to say, “no more” or we will continue down this road of destruction of democracy. The citizens of Vermont have repeatedly elected Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-described “socialist”, an Independent, and someone with a record of working FOR the citizens of his state. Jesse Ventura was elected as Governor of Minnesota from the “Reform party”. The citizens in the remainder of the country need to recognize that Democrats and Republicans are not representing our collective interests…instead they are representing the corporate and campaign donors interests. Maybe we will keep the two party system…but let the current political Democrats and Republicans merge. Then create a new second “citizens” party (the former Democratic party).

I will not cry if Palin wins (or any other republican), because that will force the Democrats to remember who we are.

With all due respect, whatever makes you think the current Dems would do anything but misinterpret any messages sent by the voters and move further to the Right?

It’s what they do; it’s what they are: totally clueless

maybe so, but at the end of the day, I think Progressive values and hard-fought victories of the past will live longer and not be repealed if a Republican wins rather than a Democrat. Democratic presidents are far more capable of completely dismantling Progressive architecture, because they can sit on our faces while they do it. And the traditionally Democratic-inclined media will let them.

If a Republican does it, the Dems and the media jump on it to make hay of it, which is ultimately good, because it allows us to be able to stop it.

We stand a better chance facing our enemy than we do when our enemy stabs us in the back and silences the deed (as is done when the Democratic Party Machine candidate is in the white house).

S P I N E L E S S !!!!!

This strikes me as guilt by association, not a legitimate objection. The Republicans are funding this Green campaign to make what looks to be a close PA race more advantageous to them. It’s a tactical move.

Does it change what the Green Party is about? If it does, the Greens will cease to be useful to the GOP here, because then it won’t draw progressive voters.

The GOP is thinking tactically here, which is something that progressives, by and large, can’t seem to manage, because they come up with these sorts of specious objections. If the progressives vote Green, then the Democrats lose, and they know why. That’s a point that needs to be made. If progressives want to count in future Democratic Party decisions, they need to show that they are willing to go elsewhere.

If the Republicans are willing to fund that, great. It saves our money for something else. Sounds like a win-win to me.

Don’t worry about the Dems, or most of the rinos, they will all be replaced soon.
Ron Reale
realetybytes at yahoo dot com
realetybytes.townhall.com