Jan
19
Glued To Their Thighs
ByJon Stewart once again voices the baffled frustration most Democrats feel when contemplating the Party leadership. No matter what happens in Massachusetts today, Democrats are still holding all the cards. The question is, “Why do they refuse to play them?”
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Mass Backwards | ||||
|
||||
35 Comments
January 19th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
Wndrfl nd pthy sgmnt.
nd t pnts t ths grt trth:
Th nly wy Rpblcns cn mntn thr crrnt lvl f dscnnct nd mdcrty nd stll wn n th lng trm, s t hv th sntch-dft-frm-th-slvrng-jws-f-vctry Dmcrts s ppnnts.
Rate this comment:
1 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 6:40 pm
I know a guy who says he almost hopes Brown wins so as to wake Obama the hell up. I think I agree. You can do more with 51 votes and a backbone than with 60 votes and an overcooked strand of vermicelli.
Rate this comment:
4 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 8:31 pm
A Democrat on the right track http://www.economyincrisis.org/content/patriot-employers-act-could-provide-economic-boost
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 8:40 pm
I agree with Tom Buckner, and I’ll add:
Why the hell would the Democratic party care about progressives? Who are we going to vote for? Republicans?
Jon’s astute comments stem from from an uncomfortable reality Progressives have yet to acknowledge: American politics is dominated by two wings of a corporate party. One plays the Good Cop, the other plays Bad Cop.
We don’t have a functioning multi-party democracy that holds anyone accountable for failing to implement change.
And thus, while other countries have universal healthcare, a Hadron Super Collider, a program to develop an Energy Supergrid, and Highspeed rail – we are stuck arguing whether teh gheys should be allowed to marry.
Every year our nation slips farther behind the rest of the world in every aspect – because instead of working for real change, Progressives are obsessed with electing neutered Democrats.
And, yes, I recently learned an easy way to add hyperlinks. Thanks for asking.
Rate this comment:
4 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
I agree with Tom Bucker, and I’ll add:
Why the hell would the Democratic party care about progressives? Who are we going to vote for? Republicans?
Jon’s astute comments stem from from an uncomfortable reality Progressives have yet to acknowledge: American politics is dominated by two wings of a corporate party. One plays Good Cop, the other plays Bad Cop.
We don’t have a functioning multi-party democracy that holds anyone accountable for failing to implement change.
And thus, while other countries have universal healthcare, a Hadron Super Collider, a funded program to develop an Energy Supergrid, and functioning Highspeed rail – we are stuck arguing whether teh gheys should be allowed to marry.
In short: Every year our nation slips farther behind the rest of the world in every aspect – because instead of working for real change, Progressives are obsessed with electing neutered Democrats.
Rate this comment:
1 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 9:16 pm
All I can say is: Mr. Second-Coming-of-Lincoln, it’s time to fire General McClellan.
Hire General Grant to replace him.
Rate this comment:
2 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 9:43 pm
Ckly jst cncdd, Brwn wns.
Dg, thnk y’r gt t. bm’s mstk ll lng ws n hrng th wrng ppl r, t lst, th wrng typs f ppl – .. t mny cdmcs nd nt ngh mngrs wh hv ctlly rn stff.
Grnt, whn skd t vlt McCllln ftr th wr, sd “”McCllln s t m n f th mystrs f th wr.”
Hr’s pht f Lncln wth McCllln:
< hrf="http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Fl:Lncln_nd_McCllln_1862-10-03.jpg" rl="nfllw">http://n.wkpd.rg/wk/Fl:Lncln_nd_McCllln_1862-10-03.jpg
Bt th RL mystry ws why th Dmcrts chs McCllln t rn gnst Lncln n 1864. H lst gn.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 10:32 pm
I just read that line by Grant at Wikipedia. That’s typical Grant, understated and wry.
To be more specific, I think Rahm/Axelrod were like McClellan in that they didn’t use the advantages they inherited from the campaign more effectively to advance the priorities the campaign won on.
Rate this comment:
1 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 10:39 pm
Another take on Brown’s win from Markos Moulitsas:
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 19th, 2010 at 10:42 pm
Independent voters don’t like the attitude “we’ve got the votes and we will shove it down your throats.” The President campaigned that he would change the culture of Washington. Perhaps voters should not have been skeptical but if the defiance continues, November will be a tough year on the Dems. Don’t blame Coakley, look in the mirror.
The major problems facing our country health care, jobs, terrorism, dependence on foreign oil, etc. will never be solved by one political party, as the President stated at the 2004 Dem. Convention, we are not red states or blue states, we are the United States of America. Governing in tough times is never easy but it is much more difficult when our leaders become arrogant and refuse to cross party lines. Republicans suffered in 2006 and 2008 from this syndrome and it looks like it has crossed parties. We will see if our leaders in DC remember the President’s words from almost six years ago.
Rate this comment:
0 
2
January 19th, 2010 at 11:11 pm
There are two parties? Either I am paying too close attention or not close enough.
Rate this comment:
2 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 5:52 am
Coakley and Fisher and Whilden. Oh my.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 8:18 am
Nathan,
Did Independents like it when the Republicans “shoved it down our throats” from ’00 to ’06? The Republican minority has made it clear they are not interested in bipartisanship, only in creating a “Waterloo” for Pres. Obama. “Not interested in crossing party lines”? This would indicate that you believe Republicans made a good faith effort to reach out to our new President. This would be entirely incorrect.
Changing a culture takes more than one year, and I feel Obama has made some very human missteps. However, the idea that newly-minted Independents (they used to be called Republicans but became disenchanted with the politics of their leaders) and long-standing Independents are voting Republican because Democrats are being legislative bullies isn’t so.
You don’t need to look any further than the current Frankenstein of a health care bill to see that. It’s more conservative than anything we would have seen in the Nixon era.
January 20th, 2010 at 8:57 am
“Independent” is a useless term. Independents are simply people who vote Party but want to seem hip and above it all. When was the last time you met someone who actually split their ticket in a state or national race?
I agree with Markos Moulitsas: Respect the voters. Don’t feel entitled. Work your ass off. And don’t take vacations in an election year (especially to Hawaii on the public dime).
The reason Coakley lost was because too many people believed that she couldn’t lose.
And “changing the culture of Washington”? Please — that’s nothing but an election-year bromide. No one is really interested in changing the culture of Washington (whatever that means). Besides, in the modern age of ratings-driven pseudonews and Twitter Soapbox Streams, I see us only becoming more divided as a nation, not less.
Wow, that was depressing.
Rate this comment:
1 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 9:04 am
I really don’t have much to add to Gordon’s reply, Nathan, but in case anyone missed it, this was the money quote from your comment.
Moreover, let’s be clear what “crossing over party lines” meant in the Senate for the past twelve months. It meant throwing out a popular solution to the health care problems we face (the public option) in order to appease a party that had a superminority in that body. Even with the Brown victory, that’s still what it means. But I guess that’s democracy: bending to the will of a rump minority.
Rate this comment:
2 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
A thought for your consideration: Martha Coakley is a conservative Democrat. As a delegate in the 2008 primaries, voted for Clinton even she conceded her loss to Obama.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 2:58 pm
Public Policy Polling has some good insights about the Brown victory. They also have the polling numbers to back these claims up.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 9:32 pm
Doug Gibson @ comment 4 is reading my miiiind!
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 9:33 pm
Sorry, it was comment #6 I was talking about.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 9:59 pm
Keep drinking the Kool Aid guys. Don’t listen to me, listen to the people of Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts.
I don’t think the majority party made a good faith effort to reach out to the minority party. Check out Politico on Jan. 23, 2009 where the President tells the Republican leaders “I won” and he, Speaker Pelosi, and Majority Leader Reid would dictate the content of legislation. Politico from Feb. 5, 2009 detailing the President’s speech to the Democrat caucus at the Kingsmill Resort. You think if we were truly post partisan that it would have lasted at least one month. Where is Bill Clinton when we need him?
Rate this comment:
0 
4
January 20th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
A Democrat on the right track part 2: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17063
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
Jim,
That Democrat was the Green Party nominee for President.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 20th, 2010 at 11:22 pm
A Democrat on the right track part 3… http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10092009/watch.html Hint it’s NOT Michael Moore. These are the folks who represent “change” unlike the party leadership. Cynthia McKinney was a Democrat member of congress,Ron Paul was Libertarian candidate for president once while a registered Republican.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 6:46 am
Jim, the adjective form is “Democratic member of Congress,” not “Democrat member of congress.” Similarly, we don’t say “Repubic member of Congress” when we mean “Republican member of Congress.”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 10:18 am
Several dictionaries I have looked at don’t agree. Funk and Wagnalls Standard Dictionary (1964) says a Democrat is “A member of the Democratic party of the United States”, while democratic is defined as “Of or pertaining to democracy or of a democracy”and “Pertaining to or characteristic of any democratic party” Websters New international Dictionary says a Democrat is “A adherent or advocate of democracy…” and “A member of the democratic party” while the most relevant definition of democratic is “designating or pert. to the Democratic party of the United States”.The Democratic party definition explains “It has advocated a strict construction of the Constitution,sharp limitation of the powers of the federal government,and a broad construction of the reserved powers of the States.It has generally pronounced in favor of a low tariff, practically for revenue only. (how things have changed)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 11:57 am
repubican
Anyone who holds very traditional, moral, and christian views toward his own pubic hair.
“Please, don’t touch my bathing suit area! I’m a Repubican”
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=repubican
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 12:09 pm
Jim,
Your dictionaries aren’t wrong, but when we use Democrat to describe something else, like a party, it is then an adjective. As such, the adjectival form of Democrat is Democratic, though in many cases Democratish would probably do.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 2:00 pm
I can tell you from personal experience that when a Republican uses the term “Democrat Party” it’s usually done so pejoratively. Or maybe it’s just a redneck thing.
That’s how Don Yelton says it, so you never know.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 6:43 pm
why is it the only comments are about my use of a word instead of the contents of the links provided?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 7:14 pm
no one actually reads the links?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 10:58 pm
Jim, the Global Research link s down right now.
Ah, Rep. Kaptur. She’s good. But right now my fave member of the House is Alan Grayson.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 21st, 2010 at 10:59 pm
Oh, it’s up now. Bookmarked that Haiti article.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:45 am
And to continue a bad week for Democrats this… http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/01/air_america_radio_goes_silent.html
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 22nd, 2010 at 7:50 am
Overheard on the Twitter (and too funny not to share):
Rate this comment:
0 
0
January 22nd, 2010 at 9:14 am
Jim, the Air America demise contrasts with far-right media such as the Washington Times, which keep going at a loss for decades because they have filthy-rich backers who know that it’s a good investment.
Rate this comment:
1 
0