so geithner speaks to david gregory and the first response is from grover norquist on mtp

[spanone]

a fucking lobbyist

fuck this asinine show.

[KharmaTrain]

1. And Grover's Elephant In The Room...

...someone (I'm pretty sure it was Rachel) went through the list of people who "contribute" to Grover's little treehouse. There's the usual suspects...Kochs, DeVos and many other deep pockets. The fear of Grover is his ability to fund teabaggers in primaries...and right now that scares the shit out of a lot of rushpublicans. Even those who are in "secure" districts are wary of this shitstain...

[BlueStreak]

2. We will never get rid of Norquist until we puash the GOP completely into his camp

We need to push them so hard they either give up their seats to teabaggers or else they stand up to Norquist. As it is now, we have allowed them to have the best of both worlds -- looking almost like they are sane, reasonable people. We need to push them so hard, their agenda is laid bare to the average American.

[KharmaTrain]

3. It's A Tall Order For 2014...

...the unfortunate problem is the gerrymandering and divisions of the country have created some very red districts that will take a lot of work to unseat any incumbent. The good news of the past election is no matter how much money the uber rich throw to try to buy the White House, the power of the "little guy" can and will prevail at the ballot box. That's not quite the game on the Congressional level. Until teabaggers lose in red districts...even if its to "moderate" rushpublicans the party will kow tow to Grover and his lobbyist buddies.

[cilla4progress]

5. Yeah,

what YOU said! Esp. about the last election. Hope reigns!

[BlueStreak]

6. I am suggesting exactly the opposite. The way to get rid of teabaggers ...

is to elect them and let the public really see who they are. Or better, let them win their primaries and then implode in the general election campaign.

What I am suggesting is the Todd Akin strategy, where McCaskill actually ran ads in the primary PROMOTING Akin.

Force the GOP to be so extreme that nobody will want to support them.

Yes, we will lose the reddest districts, but this is the the best strategy when looking at the entire chessboard. We lose those red districts anyway. We are better off if a truly insane one like West or a complete sleazeball like Walsh holds that district. We can win those after two years.

And people like Akin and Mourdock didn't just cost the GOP 2 Senate seats. Arguably they lost the whole damn election for the GOP. We need more teabaggers, not fewer. More Sharon Angles. More Sarah Palins. More Christine whatshername.

[KharmaTrain]

7. The Problem With Burning The Village...

...is some are already burnt and in need of help. For every Akin that showed how ugly the true "conservative" agenda is, there were two Akins that were elected or re-elected to the House and even more to the state legislatures. We have several states like Arizona where wacko rushpublicans have taken control...their agenda is well known...and have pushed through all sorts of draconian laws that will take decades to reverse.

They key is to continue building a bigger and broader-based party that can field candidates competitively in any and all races. For years the Democratic party neglected party building in many now red states while the fundies and wingnuts made sure their candidates won dog catcher. Mooselini in Alaska and Bachmann both started on school boards...running unopposed or against poorly funded and organized candidates.

The great lesson of the past election is that mobilizing the Democratic base can make a big difference in a national election. Now the aim should be to focus on the downticket races...take control of state houses and redraw the districts to our advantage. It's a tall order but if people want change, the blueprints are there...

[BlueStreak]

9. We had a Presidential candidate that didn't give a shit about anybody but himself

How many times did he say "I need you to give me a Democratic Congress that will move this country forward"?

Answer: never. He never said anything remotely like that. It was all about him.

How many times did he campaign for any Representatives or Senators?

I am not positive, but I think the answer is zero.

I realize the presidency is important, but we have to win the House too. We need to do what we can in 2014, and in 2016, we need a candidate who will work hard to bring the House with him or her.

[KharmaTrain]

10. Longevity Comes From The Bottom Up...

I heard the President call for Democrats to be elected to the House and Senate at most rallies I watched...he also had the local candidates up on the stage with him. Just cause they don't show it on the snippets doesn't me he didn't work for electing Democrats downticket. Fact is Democrats did far greater than anyone had expected in the Senate races where the "pundits" had all but assured the rushpublicans control. Sure didn't happen that way. Democrats also picked up house seats.

History now works against the President as the party in power usually loses seats on the 6th year of an 8 year Presidency...it happened to dubya in '06. The President is a transitional figure in this picture...to win the House you need a strong "ground game". We won the House in '06 without a strong President. It was the payoff on Dr. Dean's 50 state strategy (that Democrats need to get back to).

The OFA infrastructure is a great starting point..and that part of the Presidential campaign made a BIG difference in several Senate and House races...getting people to the polls and making sure they stayed there. The OFA problem is its only based in the states that meant the most in winning the Presidency...can it be expanded to all 50 states...or more specific, red ones? Again, the rushpublicans built their power in the 80s and 90s through building a strong grassroots base that helped them win a majority of state legislatures that set the boundaries for Congressional districts and conduct elections. If we're to look to a long-term Democratic majority across the country, it starts on the very local level...not from a popular personality at the top.

Cheers...

[BlueStreak]

12. "Give me a Congress that will work with me."

That is what you never heard. And that was a conscious decision because he wanted to gently peel off some Republican voters who would split their ticket.

By not prosecuting the case against this worst Congress ever, he really doesn't have much of a mandate to force them to behave any differently. And they aren't.

He cot himself elected, period I'm glad for that, but we are still screwed until we can deal with the House.

Obmaa has a second chance. There is absolutely nothing that prevents him from going out and kicking some Congressional ass as we lead up to 2014. Obama doesn't have to run again, so there is no reason for him to play it safe.

[cilla4progress]

4. Y'know, who the f****

is Grover Norquist anyway? And how does someone like that, with no elective, delegated authority, hold this country by the balls?

We - or a portion of us anyway - are truly dimwits.

[spanone]

8. if you go to meet the press webpage, you actually see this headline...

Tax reform activist Grover Norquist leads a panel in discussion of what tax changes to expect out of a final fiscal cliff deal.

now someone tell me why a fucking lobbyist is 'leading a panel discussion' of any fucking kind?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032608/

[coalition_unwilling]

11. MTP appears on NBC, which in turn is owned by GE (the nation's second-largest

defense contractor).

Do you really expect fair play from a corporate whore?

Best antidote is not to watch. Deny NBC advertising eyes.