Seriously, have some "progressive" Dems around here lost their minds?

[theHandpuppet]

I'm sitting here reading post after post from Obama supporters who are mulling which Republicans might be good for his cabinet or even as Vice President!! Does the platform of the Democratic Party mean nothing to you?

Here's one of your Republican "golden boys" who you think would be such a swell addition to an Obama administration, Chuck Hagel:

Hagel's scorecard from the Human Rights Campaign --- 0%
Hagel's scorecard from NARAL --- 0%
Hagel's scorecard from the ACLU -- 27%
http://www.feministmajority.org/congress/PDF/110th%20CongressscorecardL.pdf

Maybe the "change" some of you are proposing is the transformation of the Democratic Party into the GOP.

[peace13]

1. Thugs are not to be trusted.

Ask Nancy Pelosi.

[rodeodance]

10. Agree, she and Reid are have learned that the hard way

[niceypoo]

79. When I read such posts ...I suspect freepers

Because no democrat in his/her right mind would do that to the country.

[midnight]

94. I hope you are right. But the dots that connect Obama to

people who prey on the inner city poor has me concerned. Obama rose from an Illinois election that was handed to him. So if he says he will reach across to Republicans and put them on his staff, I don't know what we can expect. Just thinking about the position for setting rates, and guiding our economic futures. What about George Soros for Alan Greenspans last job.

[Neshanic]

2. He's gonna do the Vulcan mind meld on them, so they will see things his way.

[rodeodance]

13. and his follower's will need some de-programming counseling.

[jonnyblitz]

3. Colin Powell for V.P.111!!!!!

I actually saw this proposed by an Obama supporter the other day. :crazy: :crazy:

[Deja Q]

4. Define "progressive".

:)

[theHandpuppet]

5. On the DU I've been reading of late...

... I'd say anything slightly left of El Duce would qualify.

[Neshanic]

6. How about not being doormats for republicans, and when they go crazy

it's us Democrats that apologize for starters.

[AndyTiedye]

32. Because the Media Always Hounds Democrats to Apologize for EVERYTHING

and won't let them speak until they do.

[Auntie Bush]

72. Some jerks around here hound Hillary to apologize for EVERYTHING.

They are just like Rethugs and they make me :puke:

[NashVegas]

9. My Definition of Progressive

People who are afraid it's a bad thing to be called liberal.

[WTyler]

33. Liberalism

has been dead as a philosophy in this country for several decades. It's only due to force of habit that people still use the word to describe people who are left of center.

[Stand and Fight]

46. Bullshit.

Sounds like a god-dammed Republican talking point. What the hell are you talking about? Dead. That's bullshit and you know it. You just wish that it was.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

52. Meanwhile, neo-conservatism is making everything else dead.

The economy.
Our soldiers.
Our middle class.
Our ethics.
Rule of law.
Competent presidents.
Oversight.
ad infinitum...

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

74. You come on a LIBERAL message board and make that pronouncement?? LOL!

:rofl:

on edit, big time grammer mistake. :-)

[niceypoo]

80. This isn't a LIBERAL message board

It is a DEMOCRATIC message board, first and foremost

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

82. Really? Does the Democratic platform not embrace the liberal platform as established

by Jefferson and, furthermore enhanced by the amendments added therein?

edit spelling, LOL. OMG

[niceypoo]

81. This is the republicans position

particularily Limbaughs, I have a feeling we wont be seeing much more of this poster here.

[Hoof Hearted]

105. Liberalism is only dead in the fevered dreams of Freepish turds.

Liberalism is poised to enjoy a fresh new resurgence.

[rasputin1952]

111. That is not true...and who on this earth would not agree that

equality, justice, education, health care, a war free period, progress, innovation are things we should not be doing or attempting to do? Progressive ideals, and damn good ones.

The progressive/liberal ideology is one of advancement, while the conservative ideology is all about maintaining/enhancing the status quo.

Not to mention that the clowns that portray themselves as "conservatives" have noting akin to what conservatives during the Eisenhower years. The GOP was hijacked decades ago, and it exists under the current regime to do little more than dumb down the population and loot the Treasury. In words of Barry Goldwater in an interview just before he died ..."these aren't Republicans, these are shitheads."

[cali]

7. Why are you so eager to believe a rumor spread by Rupert Murdoch's

flagship paper? Obama has NEVER said anything about putting Hagel in his cabinet. You're simply using this as an attack. It's sooo transparent. And desperate and sad.

[theHandpuppet]

8. Cali, reread my post

There is NOTHING in my OP that stated Obama was considering these choices. My OP was about the posts I've read from Obama supporters right here on DU. Do not misrepresent what I posted.

[Tropics_Dude83]

12. Nah

Barbara Bush says Bill Clinton is like a surrogate son to her. HRC voted for her son's war. Nah, I want the democrats to be run by democrats again and not DINOs like WJC and HRC who pass Nafta, Welfare reform, Defence of Marriage acts, etc.

*Not a snark*

[Dhalgren]

98. You'll have to drop that NAFTA thing, Obama is a big supporter

of NAFTA. You have to keep up with the "CHANGES". :hi:

[Neshanic]

16. Correct, from reading some of these items one would think that republicans couldactually be trusted.

Which of course we all know is not true.

[Cronus Protagonist]

17. Hahah, sorry to laugh, but...

"Do not misrepresent what I posted." good luck on that one lol

:P

[rodeodance]

14. Op said what is posted on this board--(by Obamafolk). where is originated is irrelevant

[niceypoo]

83. ABC says the exact same thing and quotes Obama........here are the republicans he is considering...

Obama regularly says he would look to Republicans to fill out his cabinet if he was elected, but at a town hall event in Manchester, N.H., he was pushed to name names.

“It’s premature for me to start announcing my cabinet. I mean, I’m pretty confident. but I’m not all that confident. We still got a long way to go,” Obama said.

But then the GOP names started to flow.

Sen. Dick Lugar: “He’s a Republicans who I worked with on issues of arms control, wonderful guy. He is somebody I think embodies the tradition of a bipartisan foreign policy that is sensible, that is not ideological, that is based on the idea that we have to have some humility and restraint in terms of our ability to project power around the world,” Obama said about his Senate colleague.

Sen. Chuck Hagel: “A Vietnam vet, similar approach and somebody I respect in a similar fashion,” Obama added.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger: “What (he’s) doing on climate change in California is very important and significant. There are things I don't agree with him on, but he's taken leadership on a very difficult issue and we haven't seen that kind of leadership in Washington," Obama said of the California governor.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/12/obama-says-hed.html">So, instead of doing 30 seconds worth of research, like I just did, just attack the OP!!

[rodeodance]

11. Clinton-Clark 08

[OnionPatch]

15. Please don't blame this on Obama.

I've been here four years and there has always been a certain number of people here who embrace Chuck Hagel and more recently Ron Paul.

[theHandpuppet]

22. Then speak up!

When so-called Obama supporters start tossing out names like Hagel or Powell for an Obama cabinet, speak up and tell them why that's a LOUSY idea. My god, from what I've been reading on DU some Obama supporters are willing to pass out appointments to the GOP as if they were candy favors.

[OnionPatch]

31. I've been telling them about Hagel for years!

Every time I've seen a post on how great Hagel was, I've answered that he pioneered the theft of elections with voting machines. Hated to burst their balloons. :shrug:

edited for typo.

[theHandpuppet]

38. Good on ya!

It gives me faith that there are some around here who haven't gone completely off the deep end. Why am I seeing posts from Obama supporters touting this well-documented bigot and pioneer of election theft as a potential cabinet member or even VP??

There's a damn limit to reaching across the aisles, folks, and some of you broke the speed barrier along the way.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. Exactly. Fucking. Right.

This is the backroom deal. In election after election, repub turnout for Obama is greater than that which can be explained by the disaffection for the Republican choices.

Read Chapter 7 of the shock doctrine. We're buying a trojan horse.

[fenriswolf]

19. Obama is to unify

we don't need a repub VP to draw in the repub crowd, Obama does that already, we need john edwards, or kucinich as VP to bring forth the democratic ideals.

[aasleka]

29. OMG yes!!

Dennis for VP would be a friggin dream come true!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

20. I Wouldn't Overly Complain About Him For The Defense Secretary Position. But VP? FUCK THAT.

Any independent or republican being talked about as a vp is all sorts of insane!

[Eric J in MN]

25. I agree. NT

NT

[melody]

21. Which Obama supporters wanted Hagel?

Certainly not me.

Beyond which fact, perhaps the idea was to have a wide array of opinions although, hopefully, sane ones.

[theHandpuppet]

24. Just do a search for "Hagel" among active GDP threads

Not allowed to post the URLs as per forum rules.

[Joey Liberal]

23. Does the platform of the Democratic Party mean nothing to you?

Not really.

[Cameron27]

26. Yes, some supposed progressives

have lost their minds. I stayed away during and after the debate, but how did Obama's answer about his "supposed" liberalness go over with his supporters?

[JohnnyLib2]

27. Seems at least a few have! eom.

[aasleka]

28. Actually Hagel is one of the few politicians I respect from both sides

I don't agree with a lot of his views but I do think he is an honest broker for his constituents. He has proven himself to be honest to the point of being shut out of the GOP.

[theHandpuppet]

30. So you respect the record I posted?

Anyone can be an "honest broker" for bigots, homophobes and RW fundies but that doesn't earn my respect.

[aasleka]

34. barring the policy differences, Hagel has proven himself to be honest

even when it meant going against his party and the Bush administration. Yeah I don't like some of his ideas but I do respect him for being honest.

[theHandpuppet]

37. Do you respect members of the KKK for being honest about their racism?

By that kind of logic, if you can respect a man for being "honest" then how about leaders of white supremacist groups who are honest about their bigotry? Would David Duke qualify for a cabinet appointment as long as he spoke against the war? (Note I said "spoke", as Hagel also voted for the IWR.)

Hagel is an unabashed BIGOT and the very notion that some here are willing to overlook that and even tout him for a cabinet posiiton is truly beyond belief.

[aasleka]

41. A bigot? Could you point me in the direction of an example or facts?

[theHandpuppet]

47. Did you not read my original post?

A 0% rating from the Human Rights Campaign. Do you even know what that is?

[aasleka]

84. No, please explain

[theHandpuppet]

86. You've got a brain and a computer

Use them.

[anigbrowl]

48. I hate to be the one to tell you this, but...

our longest serving senator, Robert Byrd, D-WV, is a former member of the KKK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd

Personally, I don't see Chuck Hagel as a bigot. I have a great deal of respect for him, and don't accord much weight to these stupid scores from interest groups.

[theHandpuppet]

49. And? Are Obama supporters promoting him for VP?

Are Hillary's?

You call a 0% rating from the Human Rights Campaign just a "stupid score" from an "interest group"? The only thing stupid was your dismissal of gay rights.

So nice to know some folks round here have such high regard for a man who's a homophobic bigot, virulently anti-choice, and an enemy of civil liberties. So this will be the new face of the Democratic party?

[anigbrowl]

55. Yes, I do think those scores are stupid

I don't care if they come from the Worthiest Americans EVAR Campaign, I don't pay attention to scores and rankings by lobbyin groups. I pay attention to a congressperson's voting record as a whole, without someone else filtering it for me.

I'm not dismissing gay rights, just the practise of 'scoring' politicians. Some find it useful and helpful, I don't.

[theHandpuppet]

64. Fine be me.

See posts #53, 56, 57 & 58. Plenty more where that came from.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

95. Hagel was the senator who most CONSISTENTLY voted with Bush until

he got fed up over Iraq.

His voting record was 100% pro Bush until that time. He is anti civil rights, anti environmental protection and anti protection of worker's rights or the middle class.

He is not our friend.

[AndyTiedye]

36. Not So Sure About the "Honest" Part (ES&S VOTING MACHINEZ!!)

He did get elected for the first time in an upset victory after taking ownership of the company that made the VOTING MACHINEZ!

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0301/S00166.htm

[Hoof Hearted]

106. Hagel declined to run again because his constituents are pissed at him

and the state party let him know they didn't have his back anymore.

But he's not a progressive by any stretch of the imagination. Unless all this talk about CHANGE is just bullshit - that means we need to take a sharp turn to the left in this country to get it back on track.

Republicans are the PROBLEM. I can't believe that point needs to be made here, but the hopium is starting to rot peoples minds, and their memories.

[nonconformist]

35. I've said several times that if this is the direction "change" is taking us

Then I want NO PART OF IT.

[MoonRiver]

39. If the positions of his followers are indicative of Obama's,

then he's going down in flames next November. Outraged Dems will stay home in droves.

[theHandpuppet]

40. Here's Hagel on embryonic stem cell research

http://hagel2008.blogspot.com/2006/07/hagel-statement-o...

“I do not support using taxpayer dollars for the destruction of human embryos. That is the reason I voted against legislation today to expand federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. I did vote to support promising research on adult stem cells and on ways to harvest stem cell lines without destroying human embryos. In 2001, I supported the decision President Bush made to allow federally funded stem cell research to proceed only under strict guidelines which will not result in the destruction of any additional human embryos.

“I will support President Bush’s veto of this legislation,” Hagel said.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

42. I have seen way to much it these threads on DU and quite frankly it scares the shit out of me to....

see some long time DUers agreeing with these nuts.

[LadyVT]

43. Exactly! Obama is a Republican candidate.

[Deja Q]

50. And people say the same of Hillary too.

Can both camps' supporters be wrong?

Or both right?

Or should both toast some marshmallows, get into a tent, and have a really big orgy when the stork flies overhead with bottles of beer for all?

[theHandpuppet]

54. See post #53

Then we can flip a coin.

[NorthernSpy]

44. We'll have to take help from wherever it comes, won't we?

Seeing as how certain people have promised to sit out the election in a snit.


:shrug:

[Stand and Fight]

45. Some have indeed -- and unfortunately -- lost their minds.

If they get what they're salivating over we're in big trouble. An Obama victory is a great thing, but an Obama victory that includes Republicans... I shutter to think of it.

[killbotfactory]

51. Some republicans are with the democrats on a few issues

We can work with them on those issues, but having them in the cabinet or VP position would be stupid.

[theHandpuppet]

53. What a swell guy!!!!!

PRO-LIFE AND CONSERVATIVE JUDGES
Senator Hagel has been a consistent supporter of life since he came to the Senate and has supported everyone of President Bush's judicial nominees, including Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito.

Chuck Hagel - Social Conservative (part 1)

http://hagel2008.blogspot.com/2006/07/hagel-statement-on-vote-against-using.html
As long as I'm back on series of posts from last month, I'll add another couple of posts to the series of Chuck Hagel the conservative. While Chuck Hagel's focus has never been social conservative issues, his voting record is clearly that of a social conservative.

Here are some interest group ratings based upon his voting record to give you a sense of what his voting record looks like.

Christian Coalition
1999-2000 - 100%
2001 - 60%
2003 - 100%
2004 - 100%

American Conservative Union
2000 - 88%
2001 - 84%
2002 - 95%
2003 - 100%
2004 - 87%

You can check out these two and more at this earlier post. His rating on abortion issues is solid:

Rating by NARAL Pro-Choice
2000 - 0%
2001 - 0%
2002 - 0%
2003 - 0%
2004 - 0%
2005 - 0%

Rating by National Right to Life Committee
1999-2000 - 100%
2001-2002 - 100%
2003-2004 - 82%

Here are Senator Hagel's ratings by family issues interest groups:

Family Research Council
2000 - 100%
2003 - 100%
2004 - 83%

American Family Association
2003 - 100%
2004 - 100%

[theHandpuppet]

56. And doesn't this make him even more yummy?

Chuck Hagel on Civil Rights

Voted YES on recommending Constitutional ban on flag desecration. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Voted YES on loosening restrictions on cell phone wiretapping. (Oct 2001)
Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on setting aside 10% of highway funds for minorities & women. (Mar 1998)
Voted YES on ending special funding for minority & women-owned business. (Oct 1997)
Supports anti-flag desecration amendment. (Mar 2001)
Rated 60% by the ACLU, indicating a mixed civil rights voting record. (Dec 2002)
Rated 0% by the HRC, indicating an anti-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 11% by the NAACP, indicating an anti-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)

[theHandpuppet]

57. Oh gosh -- can my heart stand all this good news??!!

Chuck Hagel on Corporations
Voted NO on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on reforming bankruptcy to include means-testing & restrictions. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on restricting rules on personal bankruptcy. (Jul 2001)
Rated 87% by the US COC, indicating a pro-business voting record. (Dec 2003)

Chuck Hagel on Abortion
Voted YES on barring HHS grants to organizations that perform abortions. (Oct 2007)
Voted NO on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
Voted YES on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life. (Mar 2003)
Voted YES on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
Rated 0% by NARAL, indicating a pro-life voting record. (Dec 2003)
Rated 100% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-life stance (190 members). (Dec 2006)

My my, shall I go on or will mass swooning ensue?

[theHandpuppet]

58. But I tell myself, why stop now?

Chuck Hagel on Environment

Voted NO on prohibiting eminent domain for use as parks or grazing land. (Dec 2007)
Voted NO on including oil & gas smokestacks in mercury regulations. (Sep 2005)
Voted YES on confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior. (Jan 2001)
Voted YES on more funding for forest roads and fish habitat. (Sep 1999)
Voted YES on transportation demo projects. (Mar 1998)
Voted NO on reducing funds for road-building in National Forests. (Sep 1997)
Rated 0% by the LCV, indicating anti-environment votes. (Dec 2003)

Chuck Hagel on Government Reform

Voted NO on granting the District of Columbia a seat in Congress. (Sep 2007)
Voted YES on requiring photo ID to vote in federal elections. (Jul 2007)
Voted YES on allowing some lobbyist gifts to Congress. (Mar 2006)
Voted NO on establishing the Senate Office of Public Integrity. (Mar 2006)
Voted NO on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)
Voted YES on require photo ID (not just signature) for voter registration. (Feb 2002)
Voted NO on banning campaign donations from unions & corporations. (Apr 2001)
Voted NO on funding for National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)
Voted NO on favoring 1997 McCain-Feingold overhaul of campaign finance. (Oct 1997)

Chuck Hagel on Health Care

Voted NO on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility. (Nov 2007)
Voted YES on requiring negotiated Rx prices for Medicare part D. (Apr 2007)
Voted YES on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000. (May 2006)
Voted NO on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D. (Feb 2006)
Voted NO on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics. (Nov 2005)
Voted NO on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug. (Mar 2005)
Voted YES on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
Voted NO on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)
Voted YES on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001)
Voted NO on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on increasing tobacco restrictions. (Jun 1998)
Voted YES on Medicare means-testing. (Jun 1997)
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage. (Apr 2001)
Rated 12% by APHA, indicating a anti-public health voting record. (Dec 2003)

Now y'all let me know if you want MORE.

[NorthernSpy]

59. what's it to you?

I thought were to have nothing to do with an Obama candidacy in the GE. I thought you were for washing your hands of the whole business.


And yet here you are, involving yourself.


Why is that?

[theHandpuppet]

60. I think some folks are either being misled or are uninformed

And all these posts about including people like Chuck Hagel in an Obama administration should be sounding the alarm bells for them. They need to really sit down and think about what it means to be "reaching across the aisle" and who's hand it is they're reaching for. And you'd better believe if any from the Hillary camp start suggesting Repukes like Colin Powell and Chuck Hagel should be in her cabinet then this thread would apply to them as well.

My question is, why aren't YOU posting threads like this one. That's what I want to know.

[Boomer]

61. No vote does not equal no discussion

The decision not to vote for Obama doesn't automatically sign you up for some silence clause on his campaign or on the Democratic politics.

What an odd notion you have that somehow a lack of support for a candidate must tranlate into avoiding all meniton or debate on the campaign.

[NorthernSpy]

65. well, maybe it kinda does...

We're talking about people who've already said that they won't support Obama if he's our candidate in the GE.

And yet here they are -- already trying to influence the discussion of who should and should not be on Obama's team.


:eyes:

[theHandpuppet]

67. So who's appointing him King?

It's my country, too. And why don't you address the OP and the discussion of Hagel? Or is attacking me the only pathetic response you can muster on this subject?

[NorthernSpy]

68. that was a non sequitur...

:shrug:

[theHandpuppet]

69. Address the OP

If you have something to say about the subject of this thread, say it. Otherwise you're just blathering to hear yourself talk. Let me know when you're actually interested in discussing the topic.

[DDQ]

88. Is that the best you can come up with? Can you respond to the information

on Chuck Hagel's voting record?

[quakerboy]

62. Agreed

No way in hell we want a republic Vice. Bad for everything, and not necessary.

On the cabinet... Well... maybe one. If we could find the right one. What we need to do is find a republic version of Lieberman(I know, insert joke here). Someone who is a suckup and will give us cover for "bipartisanship". Though that would be more helpfull to have in a senator.

just a thought.

[okasha]

63. Handpuppet, there's a honking big buried assumption

in your thread title.:yourock:

[NMMNG]

66. Oh, come now

Once Obama reaches across the aisle to him, Hagel get "the BAM", will be transformed into a true progressive politician, and all will be right in the world. You're really fretting too much. :sarcasm:

[Pathwalker]

70. AFTER Hagel votes FOR McCain, though.

You know he will.

[NMMNG]

71. Of course

:shrug:

[Chovexani]

102. Laying on those magic hands

PRAISE BOB

(Funny how this "reaching across the aisle" shit seems to be a one-way street.)

[Fox Mulder]

73. I'm sort-of an Obama supporter and I do NOT want one single

Republican in his cabinet. EVER.

[theHandpuppet]

75. Good on ya, Fox

My only advice at this point would be to keep your eye on what develops and speak out when/if it looks as if positions in ANY new adminstration are going to havded out as party favors to the GOP.

[monomach]

76. How much bitching did you do when Clinton made a Rep. his S.O.D.?

?

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

77. Didn't you just accuse Sen. Obama of ties to a serial killer?

Equal opportunity disruptor?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4848465

[monomach]

91. Are you incapable of detecting sarcasm when someone doesn't put a sarcasm tag up?

Man, this board has some people of suspect intelligence.

[theHandpuppet]

78. I hope you've enjoyed your two weeks here

May you find the next few weeks equally as entertaining.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stevenleser]

85. Do you realize how intellectually dishonest this is? Every admin hires advisors from the opposite

party. Every single one has done that. If some miracle happened and Hillary won the nomination, she would continue the tradition and name at least one 'pug to her administration/cabinet.

[tomp]

97. it's a lousy and stupid tradition and it should be abandoned.

funny how they never find it in their hearts to pick someone from the "far left" of the party but they can always find room for a republican. until both the democrats and republicans become much more progressive i want no part of bipartisanism.

[theHandpuppet]

99. Yep. Funny, that.

What do you make of a bunch of Democrats clamoring for Republicans to fill an Obama administration? When does the left-of-center Democrat get that same support? Why this constant push to the right? That's not "change" at all.

[KoKo]

87. Well...it seems to be the new "Bi-Partisan DREAM!" of the "Lions laying down with the Lambs."

...:eyes: Or many folks are "smokin' and drinkin' too much" ..these days of stress.....

:shrug: That's all I can add to this very strange occurence.

[earth mom]

89. Rethuglicans are supporting Obama that's why. nt

[donheld]

90. Hagel belongs no where near a Dem presidency.

[mattclearing]

93. Funny, I thought that was the DLC's objective.

At least if Obama puts a Republican in his cabinet, they'll have the decency to wear the R after their name so we'll know it.

[LostinVA]

96. Yes, they have

[ConservativeDemocrat]

100. Traditionally, a President has a single member of the opposite

party into his cabinet.

Yes, even GWB.

Just wanted all you ranters to remember that.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[amborin]

101. Obama says don't blame Bush and the rethugs

yet......dems have not had power in the executive office or the house or senate for years....even now dems only have the thinnest, most delicate margin.....

yet....Obama wants to blame dems also for the sorry state of things now.....

no wonder so many rethuglicans like him....a move to "post partisan" politics....that means roll over and appease

Deliverance or Diversion? By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: March 3, 2008

After their victory in the 2006 Congressional elections, it seemed a given that Democrats would try to make this year’s presidential campaign another referendum on Republican policies. After all, the public appears fed up not just with President Bush, but with his party. For example, a recent poll by the Pew Research Center shows Democrats are preferred on every issue except terrorism. They even have a 10-point advantage on “morality.”

But a funny thing happened on the way to the 2008 election.

Unless Hillary Clinton wins big on Tuesday, Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee. And he’s not at all the kind of candidate one might have expected to emerge out of the backlash against Republican governance.

Now, nobody would mistake Mr. Obama for a Republican — although contrary to claims by both supporters and opponents, his voting record places him, with Senator Clinton, more or less in the center of the Democratic Party, rather than in its progressive wing.

But Mr. Obama, instead of emphasizing the harm done by the other party’s rule, likes to blame both sides for our sorry political state. And in his speeches he promises not a rejection of Republicanism but an era of postpartisan unity.

That — along with his adoption of conservative talking points on the crucial issue of health care — is why Mr. Obama’s rise has caused such division among progressive activists, the very people one might have expected to be unified and energized by the prospect of finally ending the long era of Republican political dominance.

Some progressives are appalled by the direction their party seems to have taken: they wanted another F.D.R., yet feel that they’re getting an oratorically upgraded version of Michael Bloomberg instead.

Others, however, insist that Mr. Obama’s message of hope and his personal charisma will yield an overwhelming electoral victory, and that he will implement a dramatically progressive agenda.

The trouble is that faith in Mr. Obama’s transformational ability rests on surprisingly little evidence.

Mr. Obama’s ability to attract wildly enthusiastic crowds to rallies is a good omen for the general election; so is his ability to raise large sums. But neither necessarily points to a landslide victory.

Polling numbers aren’t much help: for now, at least, you can find polls telling you anything you want to hear, from the CBS News/New York Times poll giving Mr. Obama a 12-point national advantage over John McCain to the Mason-Dixon poll showing Mr. McCain winning Florida by 10 points.

What we do know is that Mr. Obama has never faced a serious Republican opponent — and that he has not yet faced the hostile media treatment doled out to every Democratic presidential candidate since 1988.

Yes, I know that both the Obama campaign and many reporters deny that he has received more favorable treatment than Hillary Clinton. But they’re kidding, right? Dana Milbank, the Washington Post national political reporter, told the truth back in December: “The press will savage her no matter what ... they really have the knives out for her, there’s no question about it ... Obama gets significantly better coverage.”

If Mr. Obama secures the nomination, the honeymoon will be over as he faces an opponent whom much of the press loves as much as it hates Mrs. Clinton. If Mrs. Clinton can do nothing right, Mr. McCain can do nothing wrong — even when he panders outrageously, he’s forgiven because he looks uncomfortable doing it. Honest.

Bob Somerby of the media-criticism site dailyhowler.com predicts that Mr. Obama will be “Dukakised”: “treated as an alien, unsettling presence.” That sounds all too plausible.

If Mr. Obama does make it to the White House, will he actually deliver the transformational politics he promises? Like the faith that he can win an overwhelming electoral victory, the faith that he can overcome bitter conservative opposition to progressive legislation rests on very little evidence — one productive year in the Illinois State Senate, after the Democrats swept the state, and not much else.

And some Illinois legislators apparently feel that even there Mr. Obama got a bit more glory than he deserved. “No one wants to carry the ball 99 yards all the way to the one-yard line, and then give it to the halfback who gets all the credit,” one state senator complained to a local journalist.

All in all, the Democrats are in a place few expected a year ago. The 2008 campaign, it seems, will be waged on the basis of personality, not political philosophy. If the magic works, all will be forgiven. But if it doesn’t, the recriminations could tear the party apart.

[Chovexani]

103. Great article but you'll have to edit it down to 4 paragraphs

As per DU copyright rules.

[Hoof Hearted]

104. you don't question "The ONE" you don't question "The Movement"

You believe.

[Catherina]

107. The neoliberals are losing their grip in more ways than one

When the neoliberals took over the Democratic Party, their Hyde Park Declaration was a declaration of war against the party's base. If PNAC light is fine with you, so be it. It's not fine with me. And thank you no, I haven't lost my mind but I do wonder about the mind of Clinton's core supporters who seem more DLC than rational.



Hillary's "Dream". America's Nightmare

"I'd like to make it clear to the people who run the Democratic Party that I will not support Hillary Clinton for president. Enough.
Enough triangulation, calculation and equivocation. Enough clever straddling, enough not offending anyone." -- Molly Ivins

No thank you. No thank you to Bill. To Hillary. To Lieberman or to any of the other neoliberal rats who perverted the party's platform into one of war and militarism. I'm not opposed to Republicans. I'm opposed to neoliberals and neoconservatives. If Obama wins and replaces that type with good old-fashioned conservatives who care about this country and its people, that will already be a major improvement.

Democrat Party vs GOP. That is soooooo yesterday. We have bigger problems now sister so just hold on to your hat for a while. Things may get a little bumpy as we take our party back.

[Marie26]

109. Obama's top advisor is the DLC senior economist

Hate to burst your bubble:

Austan Goolsbee - Senior Economist, DLC/PPI

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254329&kaid=86&subid=191

[Catherina]

112. I'm not worried about an advisor here or there. Hillary is the Queen of the DLC

Besides, Obama already told her she could be an Advisor. Being likable enough and all that you understand ;)

He explains it very nicely here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhPxSm9Es0w


You don't get it do you? It's not including the DLC I'm against, because God knows there are selfish people everywhere who need to be accommodated in politics, it's allowing the DLC to have full control and hold the rest of us hostage. The age of entitlement needs to end.

Seriously, doesn't stuff like this embarrass you? "Lifting yourself up through hard work"- yep, that's what we say to the poor right before we cut all the safety nets- "lift yourself up through hard work".

DLC | Speech | July 24, 2006
Remarks of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton at the 2006 DLC National Conversation
By Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton
"Our strength, our economy, our values derive from the promise of America, the promise of lifting yourself up through hard work in a society that rewarded results."

It's the same message the DLC has for all those orphans in Iraq. "Get over it kids. Pull yourselves up by your bootstraps!"

[CaliforniaDemocrat]

108. awesome post

[anitar1]

110. When that KoolAid tastes sooo good it begins

to change minds . When there is worship, one can be turned, easily.