Looks like a lot of people here want to kick Gabby Giffords out of the Democratic Party

[Recursion]

http://www.third-way.com/co_chairs/31

Not to mention James Clyburn and John Dingell...

[bravenak]

1. I saw this thread coming.

[think]

2. Some speak about people. Some speak about policy

Best wishes...

[MannyGoldstein]

3. I don't think anybody wants to do that

We just don't want people with destructive ideas like those to have the power to destroy lives on a massive scale.

[Rex]

9. Well their cries of Purge last night caused not even a stir

so now we are down to two people. Boy wouldn't Stalin be upset.

And of course we are talking about the group of investment bankers and they pretend we are talking about Bill Clinton.

[Recursion]

12. The group of investment bankers aren't in the party (nt)

[Rex]

13. Again, yes some of them are.

You really should do some research first.

[Recursion]

14. Which ones? You've apparently done the research. Tell me. (nt)

[Rex]

15. You can't google their board of directors and do 5 seconds of looking for yourself?

Seriously, I think you can.

[Recursion]

20. Closest I can come up with is Daley

He was running for Illinois governor for about 5 minutes earlier this year, but even that's not a party position.

[Skidmore]

31. Then start by not

denigrating people and find ways to work with them toward better policies. I am not expressing anything I have not said here before. There is a tendency to label people here who agree with ideas but not the tactics. You alienate potential allies this way. I know for a fact that this has occurred. While "purging" may seem attractive, it can be destructive too. We are not Republicans and most of us are likely just citizens trying to live our lives the best way we can. We are also not like Teabaggers and willing to hurt others more. Alienating others who are not always the big movers and shakers you perceive them to be is not constructive.

[shenmue]

4. Sigh

I was happy for five whole hours. Now I've got to hide under the bed again.

[JonLP24]

5. She is no longer a Representative

or politician actively running.

One of the things I'm aware of she came out in favor of publicly since office were gun control measures.

[Recursion]

6. Clyburn is

So is Dingell.

I just get tired of DU chasing the next shiny thing it finds with abandon every 36-48 hours.

[JonLP24]

7. Don't know much where they stand when it comes to policy

q

[Recursion]

8. Both pretty liberal

http://www.ontheissues.org/house/james_clyburn.htm

http://www.ontheissues.org/MI/John_Dingell.htm

Well, Dingell has some ties to auto manufacturers that drag him a bit to the right, and is somewhat anti-choice (Catholic, but then again Kucinich was anti-choice until 2002 or so).

[JonLP24]

10. I think the best places to look

to judge the group is here and the compromises they advocate whether should be part of a party platform or not would be to look here whether than individual members.

http://www.third-way.com/programs/social_policy_and_politics_program

[Recursion]

11. They push some really bad policies

What's less clear is the extent to which they bear any relation to the Democratic Party.

[think]

16. What is bad policy?

[Recursion]

17. You want a list of the bad policies they promote? That would take a while

Changing Social Security to a system of private accounts is the most glaring one.

[Rex]

19. Do you know what Reaganomics is? They believe in 3 of the 4 pillars of Reaganomics.

Bad policy = trickle down economics.

[think]

21. That doesn't sound like that would make anyone happy

just say no to trickle down.....

[Rex]

23. It made investment bankers very happy and trillions of dollars over the decades.

It's destroyed the working class.

[JI7]

18. it's meaningless on this site , there were posts attacking Third Way for one of the Dem

campaign committees not funding the Landireu runoff election because republicans will control the senate anyways and she is unlikely to win.

so third way wants landrieu to lose because landrieu is a liberal or what ?

[ucrdem]

22. Thanks Recursion, yep, it's a silly meme but this is the internet

Last edited Sun Nov 9, 2014, 02:11 AM - Edit history (1)

and ya gotta love DU warts and all. The "third way" business took me a while to figure out as it's basically a telescript mcguffin used to cover socially unacceptable impulses, mainly Paul-o-philia and ODS, my favorite example being "with extreme prejudice," the mother of all Freudian slips.



Anyway keep on keepin' on!

[hootinholler]

24. That claim is really disingenuous

Some may think poorly of you for pulling that kind of crap.

[Recursion]

27. What's disingenuous about it?

Clyburn and Dingell are the top ranked current honorary co-chairs; are they better examples?

If it's in fact OK for some Democrats to be in Third Way, which ones?

[stevenleser]

25. Your point is well taken. Beating up bogeymen is easier than focusing on specific policies and

issues.

[think]

26. Like the TPP?

[djean111]

28. We will be getting our instructions on how the TPP is a GOOD thing, shortly.

[RiverLover]

30. Acc to this, TPP, the right wing corporate "democratic" plan of Obama's -may- be delayed by GOP win

What the 2014 Election Results Mean for Trade Policy

"The GOP takeover of the U.S. Senate probably reduces the chances that President Barack Obama gets Fast Track at all before his presidency is over or that a deal is completed on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). There has been a major corporate PR campaign to push the opposite narrative. However, a close look at the interplay of the actual politics and policy on Fast Track and the TPP show that the GOP election sweep may, counter-intuitively, actually not promote the corporate trade agenda."
http://www.exposethetpp.org/

***********

fyi~

Trans-Pacific Partnership:

"Although it is called a "free trade" agreement, the TPP is not mainly about trade. Of TPP's 29 draft chapters, only five deal with traditional trade issues. One chapter would provide incentives to offshore jobs to low-wage countries. Many would impose limits on government policies that we rely on in our daily lives for safe food, a clean environment, and more. Our domestic federal, state and local policies would be required to comply with TPP rules.

The TPP would even elevate individual foreign firms to equal status with sovereign nations, empowering them to privately enforce new rights and privileges, provided by the pact, by dragging governments to foreign tribunals to challenge public interest policies that they claim frustrate their expectations. The tribunals would be authorized to order taxpayer compensation to the foreign corporations for the "expected future profits" they surmise would be inhibited by the challenged policies."
http://www.citizen.org/TPP

Also see~

https://wikileaks.org/tpp/

Can't imagine why the media isn't covering this more...oh yeah, corporations support them through advertising.

[stevenleser]

32. No. nt

[Bandit]

29. Did either of those deny they voted for Obamacare or run around saying they have to fix it?

Did either of them say it was all Obama's fault that they voted the way they did? Many "Democrats" did just that and those "Democrats" had their asses handed to them.