And They Think We Should Vote for Them Because … ?

By now you’ve probably heard that the Gang of 14 scuttled the Alito filibuster. But I agree with Kos; we accomplished something amazing. “The Alito vote may have fizzled,” Kos writes, “but you better believe the Dem establishment knows we exist.”

So the next step is to get more Dems in Congress. But what about the Dems who caved today? They are: Akaka (HI), Baucus (MT), Bingaman (NM), Byrd (WV), Cantwell (WA), Carper (DE), Dorgan (ND), Inouye (HI), Johnson (SD), Kohl (WI), Landrieu (LA), Lieberman (CT), Lincoln (AR), Nelson (FL), Nelson (NE), Pryor (AR), Rockefeller (WV), Salazar (CO).

Some argue that red state senators like Landrieu need to walk carefully, but there’s no excuse for blue staters like Lieberman to be such a toady. That’s why Ned Lamont needs to win the Connecticult Democratic senatorial primary this year.

Short takes:

Via Steve M: Fox News reports:

A new provision tucked into the Patriot Act bill now before Congress would allow authorities to haul demonstrators at any “special event of national significance” away to jail on felony charges if they are caught breaching a security perimeter.

Sen. Arlen Specter , R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, sponsored the measure, which would extend the authority of the Secret Service to allow agents to arrest people who willingly or knowingly enter a restricted area at an event, even if the president or other official normally protected by the Secret Service isn’t in attendance at the time.

Rightie blogger Bruce Kesler says leftie bloggers are vulgar. Has this guy tuned in to the Rottweiller lately? And are wingers born with a hypocrisy gene, or what?

Jeanne d’Arc explains how to escape from Guantanamo: Be Osama bin Laden’s bodyguard. If you’re an innocent nobody locked up by mistake, however, be prepared to stay awhile.

Wes Clark endorses single payer. Yes!

16 thoughts on “And They Think We Should Vote for Them Because … ?

  1. I think, sadly, they know people will vote for them because “where else are you going to go”? It’s a sad commentary, but the two party system has so entrenched the idea that you throw your vote away if you vote for anyone but the incumbent of your party.

  2. lurker: You miss the point. We’ve got to hit the Dem primaries and get some more progressive Dem candidates in the general elections. The two-party system IS entrenched, in large part because of elections laws, so the goal is to take back the Dem party. We will no longer sit back and accept whatever weenies the party wants us to vote for.

  3. I don’t mean to be vulgar. I once learned that you can’t have a word apart from a concept, and that concepts are defined by the word. Sometimes a complex concept can only be described in it’s totality by a particular word. So when I read Bruce Kesler’s moralizing about potty mouth without his considering the necessity for truth and exactness in the expression of concepts and his moral judgements upon others understandings, I feel compelled to say, Fuck him…not because I delight in vulgarity but because there are no other words in the English language to express that concept.

  4. No, I didn’t miss the point–I’m saying that’s the problem. People don’t want to take the chance of voting for someone who doesn’t have a good shot at winning. And the problem perpetuates itself.

  5. Potty mouth is pretty benign compared to the verbally abusive language used by the radical right in any reference to people who think differently to them; e.g., Ann Coulter and friends. I don’t know if it is the late hour, my advancing age, or what; but, I didn’t really get the point Kesler may or may not have been making. However, I do get Swami’s point and agree.

    There are already people working to get Lieberman out. I think it can be done, especially after what I saw the past couple of days regarding Alito.

  6. I was agreeing with you, in case you missed it.

    My impression was that you said the situation is hopeless. Maybe it is, but I’m not ready to concede.

  7. Life in America is not hopeless…as long a s you are a large corporate entity. Otherwise we are all, inevitabely, waiting to be milked for every cent we can be forced to produce.

  8. Lurker does have a point, and I have no clue how to get around it. My district has elected Heather Wilson (R:NM) three times. The first time was by the skin of her teeth, and it happened because there was a good Green candidate that got just enough democratic votes to put her over the top. Now she’s an incumbent.

    I don’t know what to do with Bingaman. He emailed me twice last week, expressing grave reservations about the Alito nomination (real correspondence, by the way, not the form letter that Domenici sends), and I urged him to support and particpate in a fillibuster.

    Bingaman is from Silver City, a small town in Southern New Mexico, and I know of no NM democrat who could come close to beating him in November. The good news is that Domenici is up for re-election in 2008, and rumor has it that he’s retiring. That seat we might win.

    I intend to keep up my correspondence with Sen. Bingaman, and keep working to make sure my progressive voice is heard. Other than that, I’m not sure what to do. Suggestions?

  9. Suggestions?

    We ARE having an impact. We ARE turning it around. Change is slow, but power establishments are big beasts that need a lot of shoving.

  10. No, I don’t think it’s hopeless. On the other hand, Republicans react to their Democratic opponent having a progressive challenger with barely disguised glee. Why? Because it means the challenger will split the Democrat’s vote and the Republican will have a better chance at winning. The challenge one would face is huge–you’d have to convince enough people to vote out the incumbent Democrat and still defeat the Republican challenger. Again, I don’t want to be the voice of doom and gloom, but the two party system does have its limitations and, well, two words for you: Ralph Nader. Of course, none of this means that progressives should throw in the towel. Giving up is never a good option. If we go down, let’s go down fighting.. not like the embarrassing display of “leadership” in the Alito fiasco of late.

  11. lurker — “the challenger will split the Democrat’s vote.” No, I don’t think so. In some parts of the country, in state and local races, yes, but in the long run, no. You’re still going by the old conventional wisdom, but the national mood is shifting. Bush has, what, a 39 percent approval rating? That’s pathetic. I think if people were given a clear alternative to the GOP, they’d take it.

    Regarding Nader, see what I wrote today.

  12. What may be needed, I think, is an election cycle where voters are disgusted with BOTH major parties (this one maybe?), and there exists TWO viable independant parties, one for the disgusted republicans and one for the disgusted democrats … maybe Libertarian and Green … so that the vote gets split *4* ways, not 3 … could work.


  13. You know, I have thought for a while now that the time is right for a 3rd party candidate. And at this point, I’ll consider any and all offers 😛

  14. The two-party system is entrenched because of the way we hold elections. People have worked their butts off trying to break the two-party monopoly since parties formed in this country. The only exception was in the 1850s, when the Whig Party fell apart. Several small parties competed to become the second major party, and the Republicans won.

    If we changed the system — allowed runoffs if nobody gets a majority, for example, then it might work. But until then we’re stuck with two parties.

Comments are closed.