- The Blue Dogs did not want to pass a budget because it would acknowledge long-term deficits and Republicans would be mean to them. But if you’re in the majority and you can’t even pass a friggin’ budget you look like an irresponsible douchebag.
- Without consulting the progressives who voted her in as Speaker, Nancy Pelosi joined the Blue Dogs to come up with a brilliant plan to pass a rule saying they had passed a budget without actually troubling themselves to do so.
- There are about 6 people on life support somewhere with the brain activity of Terry Schiavo who find this compelling.
- The rule includes a spending cap of $1.12 trillion, which was $3 billion lower than Conrad’s spending cap and $7 billion lower than Obama’s spending cap, so everyone who voted for it can swing their johnsons around and claim to be the most “fiscally responsible.”
- That means $7 billion will probably have to be carved out of funding for existing domestic spending programs, cos we know it ain’t coming out of defense
- In order to make it look like a “budget” that didn’t actually contain a budget wasn’t a complete joke, the Democrats decided to hide behind the catfood commission. The fake “budget” they say they passed stipulates reducing the deficit by roughly 3% of GDP, and the catfood commission will decide where that 3% comes from.
- More members of Congress believe in the tooth fairy than believe the catfood commission will actually carve 3% of GDP out of the deficit.
- Some anti-war Democrats say they were tricked into voting for the rule, and that they did not know the war funding provisions were self-executing. They believed that a separate vote on war funding would occur later. But in addition to agreeing that they had passed a budget, turns out they also agreed that they passed a war funding bill. So fake liberals like Kendrick Meek can campaign on being “anti-war” and tell people they didn’t vote for the war funding bill when they actually did. Cue the Schiavo chorus.
- Obama threatened to veto the bill if it included Dave Obey’s amendment to save teacher jobs. Obey’s amendment passed with only 3 Democratic defections, flipping a major bird to Obama.
- Since the Obey amendment wasn’t in the Senate bill, the House bill now has to go back to the Senate. More members of Congress believe the catfood commission will carve 3% of GDP out of the deficit than believe the Senate will embarrass Obama by passing the Obey amendment.
- Nancy Pelosi didn’t want to catch rashers of shit for allowing a vote on the catfood commission’s recommendations in a lame duck Congress, especially after they recommend cutting Social Security benefits and investing 20% of the Social Security Trust Fund in the stock market. So she distributed the blame in advance by sneaking language into the rule that agreed to hold a vote on the recommendations before January 5, 2011, and now 215 others share that honor with her. Good times.
- Budget committee chair John Spratt, chosen by Pelosi to serve on the the catfood commission, is being blamed for demanding the vote on the catfood recommendations before he’d support the rule.
- More members of Congress believe the Senate will pass the Obey amendment than believe the Chairman of the Budget Committee would buck leadership and vote against the rule.
- John Spratt conveniently hails from a conservative district, where screwing with Social Security and Medicare will actually help him, as opposed to Pelosi’s San Francisco district.
- The rule says that the House will vote on the catfood commission recommendations after they pass the Senate. But all new taxes have to originate in the House. Therefore, in order for the catfood commission plan to pass the Senate first, it cannot contain any new taxes.
- The man whose support is critical to passing the catfood commission’s recommendations, John Boehner, is no doubt knocking back boilermakers at Charlie Palmer’s in celebration right now. He had been saying “read my lips, no new taxes” until a couple of days ago. No wonder he’s singing the same song about benefit cuts as Alice Rivlin, Jim Clyburn, Alan Simpson and virtually every member of the catfood commission. It’s one big happy family now.
- You have to be f*%&ing r*#arded to think that 41 Democrats will come together to oppose Obama to successfully filibuster a straight-up “entitlement cut” in the Senate that has Republicans drooling. Dick Durbin, the man who whipped AGAINST Byron Dorgan’s drug reimportation bill, isn’t out there telling liberals to suck it up for nothing.
- Robert Gates said if he did not get his war money before July 4, he would have to do “stupid things. Since the bill now goes back to the Senate, and the Senate is in recess until after July 4, Gates is SOL.
- Dave Obey is Chair of the Appropriations Committee. If the Senate chucks his amendment, he gets to decide if he’s going to go head-to-head with Obama over saving teacher jobs.
- Obey actually has some power to f&%k people up and hold their votes if he decides he wants to fight Obama. He also gets to decide where that $7 billion is going to come from to keep spending under the cap. Those johnsons could pause in mid-swing if Obey suddenly decides to cast his gaze on their pet projects. You were saying, Rahm?
- Will Obey put up a fight? Well, he’s not running for reelection, he’s cranky by nature and he’s pissed about this. And on sentiment, he has the overwhelming support of the caucus. On the down side, God probably does not love me that much.
- The one bright spot in all of this is the prospect of watching Robert Gates get with the stupid.
22 Things You Probably Didn’t Know About Nancy Pelosi’s Fake Budget ‘n Bombs Bill |
|
| By: Jane Hamsher Friday July 2, 2010 10:18 am | |






87 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Will this really protect Spratt and other ConseraDems?
There are plenty of “deficit hawk” voters who want
the Federal government to keep its hands off of their Social Security and Medicare.
Tell me again ,I’m confused .
Why are Democrats better than Republicans?
No, he’s just claiming responsibility to keep it from falling where it belongs, on Nancy Pelosi’s shoulders.
This is her move. She owns it.
Is this what it looked like in 1915 in Russia and 1787 in France?
You know there are enough pro timeline Dems in the Democratic caucus that they could demand any speaker of the House does not bring up a war funding bill without a timeline.
so what brand of catfood would you all recommend? better start stocking up now…
At this rate, catfood is looking a little pricey.
I’ve always liked the Catfood Commission’s nickname, but to really scare the Bond Marketeers I think we should alternate calling it the Sovereign Default Commission. Nothing scares the bond market more than any country defaulting on its bond debt, which is what this commission proposes by tearing up the Social Security special bonds and not paying them back.
You’re absolutely right. I need to start talking about soveriegn debt default more.
And yet, the GREAT majority of regular visitors to this highly valued site WILL vote to relect their Dem. Incumbents running this fall. Would someone, anyone, please explain this to me?
p.s. The one time FED audit is garbage, worthless, absolutely worthless. Oops, maybe not, maybe it’s value is giving a talking point “win” to Progressives.
Great majority? not a chance. some, maybe.
And use the graphic of Max Baucus with a crown to show Sovereign Debt.
The precedent for all this was set with the ridiculous legislative hoops and self-executing nonsense that the HCR bill passed with.
When the history of this era is written, I think it’s going to be defined by two events: Citizens United, and that HCR debacle. Both defined the voters and citizens as unimportant cogs subservient to the corporate persons, and both flaunted every conceivable principle of good government and the democratic process.
Everything else we’re seeing logically follows. This gamesmanship is just Pelosi acting in the new paradigm. We have eternal war without ever declaring, we have gulags in Afghanistan outside the reach of judicial review, the President can now order the assassination of American citizens, and we pass laws without making the peoples’ so-called representatives vote on them.
All part and parcel of the same agenda. Devalue democracy, line corporatist pockets.
The Dems depend on the Reps to be even worse.
Yeah. And with the Roberts Courts killing off meaningful campaign finance reform, the corporations rule.
I have two cats — cat food ain’t cheap!
Thanks Jane for piercing the veil of deceit on Capitol Hill!
On Independence Day — DECLARE YOUR INDEPENDENCE
Independence from the Corporate media
Independence from the corporate parties
And, join truly independent advocacy groups that do not cover for the Dems when they are making massive corporate giveaways!
Kevin Zeese
ProsperityAgenda.US
VotersForPeace.US
Just wait until all that corporate money gets flowing in the 2012 elections, or centrist Executive-branch-sycophant Kagan gets on the Court.
We’re going to see quite a show over the next couple of years.
hahahahahahaha
Dems are just showing ya what independents have known for years – the whole system is a joke. Good cop, bad cop kabuki. 2 party duolpoly. Nothing more.
It sure is a good thing lots of Americans who actually thought it might make a difference or even really matter put lots of Democrats into Congress in 2006 elections. Because the Democrats needed to take over Congress before they could do the good things they told Americans they really stood for.
See 2007.
See 2008.
Then Barack Obama told us he was going to really do New Hope and Real Change if he won the WH. He was really down on what George W. and Dick The Dick had been doing too — Barack Obama was going to give Americans Change They Could Believe In.
See 2009.
See 2010 so far.
But the Democrats really are better than the Republicans and now that they are in control of both the Congress and the WH don’cha feel better?
Nancy Pelosi is a Sell Out Slime Lord.
Barack Obama is a Sell Out Slime Lord.
Whats a person who says they will do stuff but then do not do it or try to weasel around what they said they stood for?
A Fraud? A Liar? The Democrats are frauds and liars folks.
With the words. With the deeds. GOPers are no better. Democrats are worse because they say they are better than the GOPers but are not.
Time for a New American Revolution? Sure does seem so does it not?
Maybe Petey Peterson’s Catfood Panel will finally light the fuse too.
Hopefully so. Otherwise it’s back to 1890 folks. Check out how these United States were ruled and by who back then if you think not.
Mmm, I don’t know. I think we could characterize a majority of ‘regular visitors to this site’ as high-information voters, emphasis on voters. We vote, it’s what we do.
“Some anti-war Democrats say they were tricked.” — yeah, that’s the ticket.
It’s all relative. Compared to most voters, the people who visit this site are more informed. It’s difficult to visit this site and not be informed.
the default commission sounds about right.
The reference to Terry Schiavo was in poor taste and uncalled for.
John, aka Jack, Spratt – who ate no fat? Now somebody should be able to come up with a good rhyme with this – something like Jack Spratt who ate no fat but fed it to the cat- fat cat, that is, member of the Catfood Commission. You all can do this better.
Jane,
The Schiavo reference is cruel, unnecessary, and just plain stupid. Please remove it.
“rashers of shit”
Umm..
“rations of shit”?
everybody is a critic
i think you are wrong about that. I used to be in her district. I know her district. Many, particularly from FDL, will show their dissatisfaction.
So Jane when are you going to step up and urge progressives to stay home in November? Until we are ready to let the dems lose elections we will continue to get Pelosied. Which one of you prominent progressives are going to say enough lets stay home?
apologist flying monkeys. there’s one flitting about Jane’s latest FB entry as well
Well if you going down the default path, we should be talking more about Local Government Strategic Default being the best option to protect jobs and communities.
Someone has to throw this brick into the pond, as all others appear to be avoiding the topic.
Good question.
The idiocy is pervasive.Even so called progressive media people
are urging their listeners to keep supporting this bull…t (Thom Harthman).How are things going to change if we keep supporting the same old corrupt crap.
You know when your income is astronomical…you can keep tolerating shit.
see hard times haven’t reached these talkers,they haven’t had to endure umemployment,they haven’t lost their homes,their kids aren’t stuck with less teachers at their schools and so their view is very warped.
And going to the WH every now & then to socialize means you see things differently.
Thanks for all you are doing Jane.
You may not like it, so write your own post. We do not need ##s of mods.
I hope Obey ****s Barrack HW Rahmobamma over.
Ok so we have to cut stuff? How about your high tech jet fighter we can never use! What you AREN’T a fiscal conservative? You, yes you, the pr**k snickering in the corner…how about we **** up your arms manufacturing contracts?
I’M DAVID MOTHER****ING OBEY WHO THE **** WANTS SOME!? Obama! You’re going to obey OBEY!
Not least of all, Nancy-boy “hair ball” Pelosi.
Voting republican, and getting a republican majority seems a better option that a democratic house and senate.
Then the progressives, and the country, have a clear target instead of this faux populism from O’bama & the Democrats, and unwavering support from many D’s who should be vociferous in opposing the current agenda.
Thanks for the insight, Jane. I don’t see this level of analysis anywhere else – and I fully subscribe to the gonzo-taibbi over tones.
There have been lots of folks calling for just that. I’m urging all I come into contact with to WITHHOLD your vote from Democrats.
It may not work. THere may be no way we ever get our party back. But doing the same thing over and over and expecting something different isn’t cutting it either.
If all progressives withheld their votes, and the Democrats got hammered, then the fallout from that is, 1) they believe they need to move further right, in which case we realize ok, new party is our only alternative, or 2) they believe they need to return to their base. In which case we’ve got a chance to reform our party back.
But reelecting them simply because the Republicans are batshit crazy is just sending them the message they can do anything they want to and we’ll still vote for them.
Which, sadly, is what a lot of so-called progressives will do.
I don’t understand it. Never will. But those progressives that do get exactly what they deserve when the Democratic Party fucks them like this.
Midnight is right and you know it. No one is above correction when he or she makes a mistake, including Jane. She doesn’t need you to protect her.
You and a few others should get together and write a manual for purists and 3rd party organizing.
Wow, Jane…
If you’ve got something to say…out with it!
Stop beating around the bush (snicker)…
Speaking of catfood…
I’m sure the governor wouldn’t expect this to affect the number of individuals who will pay to see his latest appearance on the big screen. Fuckin’ prick.
Life’s tough, isn’t it?
Hysterical…who are you protecting? I am quite aware that Jane is a big girl; she certainly does not me to protect her. How silly.
I think Pelosi, having gotten away with it before Memorial Day, is probably see things she was caught out so big time this time.
Do I sense rebellion in the ranks?
Boy are you on the wrong site.
Of course I won’t. The very idea of encouraging people not to vote is ridiculous.
That doesn’t work for me. They sold out, period, UNLESS they get bloody (and make Pelosi all bloody) in fighting AGAINST more war funding and UNLESS they loudly demand a real vote – no self-executing trickery.
If they don’t do those things then they were NOT tricked and actually just tried to trick you and me.
Thus, I refuse to support them at all unless they spill blood as above.
[modnote: please, no violence.]
Deception is the rule so FDL exposes deception, Comes to mind Machievelli. Maybe time to localize power.
In addition…by voting Democrapic and then getting what we’ve gotten, it actually gives liberalism and progressives a bad name because people are (intentionally) tricked into believing that what the Democraps are doing IS liberalism and progressive.
I believe this is a feature of the current setup, not a bug.
I prefer the GOP in control of Congress – you KNOW what they are doing, you SEE the evil, they don’t pull punches and they present a clear target. The Democraps merely blow smoke and besmirch liberalism and progressives by tainting the “brand”.
Vote Peace Party.
Yeah, you’re right. Wish I could edit my comment above.
I’m asking folks I know to withhold their votes from D’s running for reelection, but NOT to stay home. Never.
Always stuff on the ballot to vote for. And besides, even though I’m withholding my vote from any incumbant D, I can write in someone in that space.
Not voting isn’t an option, until I’m convincned the vote tabulating operations really have been corrupted. In which case then I suppose it doesn’t matter.
I’m with you. I DO intend on withholding my vote in November, the same way I’ve been angrily withholding my money and support every time a Democrap calls me for money and support.
I really enjoy chewing their ass.
Once again, as with the new year’s surprise, we see that the Ds tend to use the shiv just before a holiday, counting on the standard MSM news story peak of 30 minutes along with the now famous short-term memories of the electorate.
Once again FDL rides to the rescue, focusing on the serious issues that sites like the great orange satan simply chalk up to protecting the team. Too blind to see that the inside the beltway folks are taking potshots for fun and profit.
How depressing can it get?
What are we going to do?
Great catch.
We’ve (those of us on the left) been struggling for responsible government for close to a hundred years. No reason to stop now.
Never. Give. Up.
Your never say die attitude is amazing, and refreshing, and I envy you for it.
But don’t you EVER get down? Don’t the odds sometimes seem…. insurmountable??
I’m trying to take your advice, I really am.
But it seems it’s getting harder and harder and harder everyday.
Glad to see you’re still the rock, though.
Peace, and hope you have a great holiday weekend.
When we lose one I ain’t dancin’ around the room. Odds? The odds have been outtasight forever. I look at this like guerrilla warfare. These people are trying to take over our country for their personal benefit. I can’t take on the whole establishment at once but I can overcome a few at a time. Fewer targets this election cycle improves the odds. They can kill me but they can’t eat me.
They can kill me but they can’t eat me.
Yes, they can but they wont. They will leave that to the elderly in their desperation as they starve with SS cuts. TPTB will then sit back and lauuuuugh. Ah, the little people, sooooo entertaining.
Thanks, Jane. No wonder Beltwayers find you “outspoken”, not something they are inclined to be; good thing, too.
More truth to that than you know.
People unable to afford to feed themselves starve to death. People unable to afford health care die of treatable conditions. Culling the herd. A consumer society requires people who are employed and able to afford the junk peddled by the capitalists. All others are disposable.
How about Germany in the early 30s?
We can only hope because I do not think anything else will really save us at this point.
Indeed. But the same kind of question had occurred to me: when are you going to advocate that people do something other than vote for Democrats as the lesser evils when the chips are down?
There are several options. One could, for example, support a challenge from a third-party candidate on the left to Pelosi (and every other establishment Democrat, for that matter) in November (last I knew you didn’t want people promoting such third-party challenges here: any change now?).
Or one could encourage voting Republican until the current slimeball Democratic establishment in D.C. has been sufficiently destroyed that the better angels in the party (if indeed they exist – there sure aren’t any standing up straight, but some of the weak reeds might rise to the occasion if given the opportunity) can start calling the shots (haven’t ever heard any sympathy for that from you, but after the past year’s treachery it seems worth asking).
Any change in this area of FDL policy in the light of these latest sell-outs? If not, I’d be interested in a more detailed explanation of what the ‘veal pen’ is and exactly why FDL is not a part (admittedly, a very unruly and well-intentioned part) of it (unless the term refers solely to support for legislation rather than for elections).
Buckle up buttercup. It was right to the point. Only the braindead could not see that. Hmmm….
Jane the Terry Shiavo reference was right on target. Please leave it in!
In the war we are all up against, the decision to choose your battles carefully is wise and prudent. The problem is there are so many god damn worthy battles. I wish there was a way to explain our dilemma without warfare terms. I am so tired of wars…
keep on keeping on…brothers and sisters
Who are these people??? We cannot allow these back door Republicans to continue duping this country that wants affordable education, real access to health care for all, and an end to all these wars.
WE are being played for fools over and over and over again.These phony Dems never grow tired of selling us out. They are like a cheating husband that won’t just leave but stays and stays for the cooking and cleaning. We are being cuckold over and over again by these creeps. Wake up America. Wake up for God’s sake. It’s almost too late.
“both flaunted every conceivable principle of good government and the democratic process.”
Would that they had! Instead, they brazenly flouted.
I will hold my nose and vote for a Blue Dog Democrat in November because his opponet is Pro Life Catholic of the far edge of the Right Wing.
Err you’re right. I can only say that I’ve grown sloppy about my diction lately.
Law school should beat that out of me.
Jane, just when I think I can’t get any more depressed I read one of your posts and you explain to me why, yes, indeed, it can get worse tomorrow. But the way you do it sure does make me smile.
Can someone tell me who is playing Reagan and who is playing Tip in this nightmare? Obama interview 2007.
“… the GREAT majority of regular visitors to this highly valued site WILL vote to relect their Dem. Incumbents …”
Sometimes I feel so lucky, NOT having any democratic incumbants to vote for. I can safely vote for the most asstastic democrat on the ballot knowing he hasn’t a snowballs chance of ever winning.
I think a lot of us on this site have been saying the same thing in different ways. I am hearing a general consensus emerge. That we all know and realize that Obama is worse than Bush for at Least one primary reason – that he has the “faux populism” as someone above said. IN other posts and articles on FDL, I’ve ssen the reference to his “cognitive dissonance” between what he says and what he does.
I’ve heard the disinformation radio shows that are helping him play the low-information Democratic voters. THese are the people who haven’t paid attention to Obama since his Inauguration speech, and before that, were sold on his soaring rhetoric (as I was sold on it). But unlike them, I have paid attention and like everyone here, I know that Obama sold a complete lie to the party, and to the American people.
Now, he and the other Dems have proven to US, the high-information, principle-first people that he was a Corporatist fraud. But OBama and Pelosi are banking on the low-information, CNN-led demobots to come out and vote them back in. And they are using SArah Palin as the bogeyman to scare the rest into doing likewise.
For the GOP, “Islamofasicm” is the bogeyman to win votes. For the Dems, its Sarah Palin.
I agree with lots of people on this site – we CANNOT allow the Democrats to continue to think that they have the ability to pull this stunt off. OBama and the Dems have proven to be WORSE than the GOP because they have the illusion of being something they are not. NOt only is Gitmo still open, but extrajudicial assassinations are now openly proposed. Bush never would have even tried that. Now, I hear Obama ready to do what BUSH WAS PREVENTED from doing – the privatization of Social Security. I will never forget that state of the union address where Bush was shut down by the Dems for even suggesting it. Remember that look of disdain on Bush’s face? Was it because he knew the Dems would be willing to really do it if was on their watch? PRobably. Because THEY ARE DOING IT NOW!
We have to send a message. And I think staying home on election day is NOT the message. BUT, VOTE for ANOTHER PARTY. vote Green. Vote Reform. Vote something. But peel your votes away from Democrats. If Sarah Palin wins, then we have sent the message. THen, the world will unite with us to make her a one-term president, and we have the low-information Dems to help with that. But more importantly, it teaches the Blue Dogs a lesson. Let every Blue Dog lose to a Republican. At least then we can call a spade a spade. I’m tired of seeing all these Republicans in Democrat clothing.
If we want to clean out the party of the Republicrats, then we have to let them lose. We have to support Independents, Greens, or anybody else who fits the mold of an Alan Grayson, Joe Sestak, Bill Halter, or even someone who is Libertarian but not Rand Paul. Somebody who hates Fox News as much as we do, who is willing to hold Wall Street accountable, and who isn’t a Theocratic fundamentalist. Somebody who is willing to bring our troops home. And who isn’t a sellout. If we can find them, support them, then we vote for them. BUT WE ALWAYS TRY TO KEEP THE BLUE DOGS OUT. I’m even willing to vote for a Republican or two in the down races if I think it will send a message to the Democratic sellout.
I think this is our only way to truly send this message. Because I hear another refrain on this site that I think we all know is coming. 1847. 1787. 1932. 1859. 1775.
This government is quickly becoming something that nobody recognizes. And it is quite willing to use all the resources of a modern technological state to achieve its ends. Even the resistance of the 1940s didn’t have to contend with such technological supremacy.
We vote them out, and we clean house. Otherwise, we accelerate to other dreaded eventualities. And those kinds of things NEVER end up going the way the idealists planned. Sometimes, the bad is replaced with the worse.
We’ll see. History (reelection rate of incumbents) shows I’m right. I hope I’m not, but to date this is irrefutable. (from Wikipedia: “In recent years (the high rate of reelection in the House) has been well over 90 per cent, with rarely more than 5-10 incumbents losing their House seats every election cycle.”
The ONLY option the Democratic Party has left Progressives is to demonstrate to our electors that we deserve to be feared as much as their Corporate sponsors.
This argument certainly has been valid in the past, but this time the Dems had Congress AND the White House. During the “Chauncey” Bush years no Congressman would dare cross Carl Rove. He knew he’d be out, scorned & ridiculed, instantaneously. Why is respecting the “independence” of Dem. Electors more important to Obama than protectinng the ideals of the Democratic Party? I assure you, it’s only because it suits Obama’s purposes.
We, the country, needed this election to right critically important wrongs, i.e. HCR. It was a once in 30 year opportunity & the amoral & causeless Obama & team squandered it like it was no more than a political chance to win back corporate benefactors from the Republicans.
Shameless, just shameless. If we reelect them we will be worse.
We’ll see. If she loses (& Reid & the rest of them), you’re right & I will toast your trust in voter awareness. Unfortunately, the odds are great that you’re wrong.
I agree. Thanks, Jane & team.
Never has this been more clear. I can’t think of one single piece of legislation signed by Obama that’s worth the trust we gave him.
The obvious first “point” is to break up the concentration of media Clinton bestowed upon us. It’s no coincidence that media finds it more eventful to focus on Tea Party “whackos”, “fringers” & “loons” than on the serious policy failings of BOTH parties. When have we been more ready and needing of “populist” candidates? Yet, the moment anyone raises serious debate, i,e, Jane, he/she’s depicted as THE problem! ENOUGH!
Dylan Ratigan’s on point with his depiction of politics today, he’s fantastic.
Pretty well said, and it hits quite a few points that I’ve been trying to make for the past 6 years, but you blunt its effect by referring to the ‘Blue Dogs’ as those who need evicting.
Unless you are (quite correctly) characterizing the vast majority of elected national Democrats in Washington as being Blue Dogs in fact (even if not in name).
I’ve reached the point where I’m going to vote against ANY current Democrat in D.C. This usually means voting Republican in my neck of the woods: simply voting third-party is effectively wasting my vote unless the Republican is a shoo-in anyway or there’s a real chance that the third-party candidate will tip the balance of the contest – though given a really good progressive I might take the plunge anyway.
If I lived in Kucinich’s district I might make him my sole exception to this rule, if only to try to make up for the threats that the alleged left made to challenge him in his primary if he didn’t support the health-care reform sham. I’m still reserving judgment on Grayson: has he ever bucked the establishment where his vote and influence actually made a major difference? And Halter and Sestak just don’t meet my criteria for progressiveness, nor have I much reason to believe that they’d raise serious hell if elected.
If a REALLY promising Democrat (i.e., one not currently holding national office and with impressively progressive and independent credentials) ran I might give him/her the chance to disappoint me. Otherwise, forget it: I’ve been ‘depriving’ national Democrats of my vote since early 2004 (usually just by leaving the relevant ballot slot blank, since aside from the top of the ticket we don’t have much in the way of progressive third parties around here), but now it’s clearly time to escalate to something a lot less passive.
Yes, a lot of people here are saying that we need to stop supporting Democrats, and some are as willing to use Republican votes to evict them as I am (because otherwise we’re just not going to get the house-cleaning that we need in order to reform the Democratic party into something useful). Whether enough fall into these camps to constitute a ‘consensus’ is not clear to me – and neither (as I suggested in 66 above) is Jane’s take on this matter.
Looks like the HuffPo has decided to spin David Obey as the Baaaad Man and that Obama’s veto was about SAVING education…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/01/obama-war-funding-veto-threat_n_633156.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/01/obama-war-funding-veto-threat_n_633156.html
“The White House weighed in with a veto threat over $800 million in cuts to education programs. The cuts would be used to help pay for the additional domestic spending, which was sought by top Democrats such as Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey of Wisconsin. The move infuriated Obey, who acidly pointed out that he had drafted legislation last year that contained the money and that even with the $800 billion cut, more than $3 billion would be left over.”
“Obey came up with almost $12 billion in spending cuts to finance the new initiatives, including money cut from last year’s economic stimulus measure and $500 million cut from the Education Department’s showcase Race to the Top grant program. The cut in Race to the Top earned a public rebuke from the White House and a veto threat as well.
“We do not believe that taking money out of that important investment makes any sense at all,” press secretary Robert Gibbs said.”
Which, in sum, is a poorly worded analysis that implies that David Obey is the villain here and that he wants to cut education spending, and that Obama will veto the bill if the education spending that Obey wants to cut actually happens.
Which is exactly 100% not what Jane was saying above. The spin war is on for them to do to Obey what they did to Massa. Eliminate him.