Yep, George Bush is a "Uniter not a Divider", all right.
He has succeeded in uniting the People of America against his Administration and the Republican party.
As Democrats, we need to unite and support the Democratic candidate whoever it is. Forget about a third party or voting for someone like Ralph Nader or Ross Perot as a protest because you don't like what the Democrats in Congress are doing. Let the Republicans who become "Independents" and vote for Ron Paul make that mistake.
Congratulate the Congress for what they have been able to do with what we gave them in 2006 and realize that as long as the Obstructionist minority and the Decider/Vetoer are there, they are hamstrung. The voters are really to blame because we did not give them the tools they needed to do what we wanted.
We must not get impatient and blow our chances to win. The election is ours for the taking. Do not screw it up by dividing the Party.
After the Democratic party gets into power we can then voice our desires to our Government.
Unlike the Republicans, Democrats listen. I don't wan't a strong leader to dictate whats best for me. I want someone who will listen to public opinion polls and hear what I am saying. Republicans consider that a weakness in their candidates but I dont. I don't want a dictator, I want a President who responds to the people.
Hang in there and support our candidates.
The Lessons Of 2007
As the year of 2007 comes to an end I find myself reflecting back on what was supposed to be a year of change. After all, we did have all the necessary ingredients. Democrats won a majority in both houses of Congress on a platform of changing the course of President Bush's disastrous Iraq war policy. Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzales, and Karl Rove all stepped down from their high-level positions in the Bush administration. Promises were continuously made to restore our civil liberties and to implement the needed "checks and balances" that were missing for so long between the executive and legislative branches of government. It appeared as if we finally begun to head down the right path.
That was all just a charade of a very short lifespan.
Congress, who we the people voted into office to bring about positive changes in Washington, have failed us again.
It is not like they were asked to cut off funding for the war. All that was asked of them was not to succumb to veto threats by Bush or filibusters in the Senate. They could have easily obstructed the wishes of George W. Bush just as he obstructs the wishes of the American people. If Bush vetoes legislation Congress has the power to send it right back to him. If the Republicans can filibuster every war funding proposal they disagree with the Democrats surely can too.
Instead, they (the Dems) just back down even with a majority of Congress and over 70% of the American people behind them. And to add insult to injury they think that we are unaware of their legislative activity. Or they feel that they have secured our votes just because they are in a different political party than George W. Bush. They actually return home for recess and brag to their constituents about their successes.
The American people know that there has been no change of course in Iraq. Blank check funding has been appropriated despite bold ultimatums of the contrary by the Democratic leadership.
Congress backed down again to Bush on the illegal domestic wiretapping of our citizens.
And as if we learned nothing from the war in Iraq, the Senate passed the Kyle-Lieberman amendment declaring Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization. I would not put it past George W. Bush and Dick Cheney to substitute this amendment for Congressional authorization if they do decide to attack Iran.
Entirely too often the Democrats talk tough about holding this administration accountable, but there is never, ever, any follow through. There has been no accountability and Bush still prevails on all the major issues that hurt our country the most here at home and our image abroad. Especially the deplorable and un-American practice of torture by our government.
(And please don't even get me started on the Children's Health Insurance Program.)
The most frustrating part of 2007 for me was knowing that we had the power to achieve change, but instead we elected leaders who lacked the courage and the will to fulfill the mandate we gave them in November of 2006. A mandate they agreed upon and promised to deliver only to renege on us at the moment of truth.
The most common excuse that satisfies the status quo is "we just don't have the votes."
The Republicans are the minority party -- why do they seem to have the votes? Because out of political fear Democrats are voting in lockstep -- bottom line.
The Democrats are the majority party of Congress, and in 2008 they better start acting like it or they will only ensure their own demise.
If there is any contribution that I can make it is to help create a perception that this way of thinking is no longer considered radical. It is the way most Americans feel -- frustrated, powerless, angry, and hungry for moral leadership. (If you lead by example, good people will follow.)
It is patriotic and American to oppose torture, illegal war, and abuses of our civil liberties.
As an Iraq veteran I feel that I have earned the right to have that opinion without being called a traitor or a radical by the pro-war element in our society who for the most part commit no sacrifice of their own. (Chickenhawk is a nice word for a coward, but if the shoe fits wear it.)
There is only a certain number of times that I can be called these names before my heart turns to stone in regard to those people who advocate for the war in Iraq, but lack the courage to go anywhere near it.
Furthermore, I have pure and utter disdain for those who call the war in Iraq "America's war" only to fight it from their office, cubical, classroom, or couch.
What is even worse is a majority of Congress that fully acknowledges that the war in Iraq is not only wrong, but the biggest foreign policy blunder in American history -- and at the same time enable it to continue while whining about it.
Before November of 2008 Congress needs to show the American people that they have the courage to stand up to President Bush and his allies in Congress -- provided there are any chances left. Because the base of the Democratic party has pretty much lost faith in their party's ability to bring about the necessary, positive, and optimistic changes that our country so desperately desires.
If Democrats in Congress continue to refuse to adapt to modern time, I'm afraid that their base will surely fade away only reemerge as an independent third party perpetuating Republican victory. If that happens most of them can kiss their political futures goodbye.
Comments for this post are now closed
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
This point from SirReal1 bears repeating:
"Vote for the most progressive candidate in the Primary." (Or write in Your Candidate.)
Your vote in the Primary counts more than in the General Election, because so few people vote in Primaries (or Caucuses, depending on what it's called in your state.)
For tips to make your Primary vote count for Your Candidate, see: http://www.countercurrents.org/swanson101207.htm, especially #3 thru 6.
So: Get your like-minded friends to vote in the Primary, and definitely write in Your Candidate if not on the ballot!
First, the Dems didn't win a majority in the Senate. In fact there are more Republican Senators than Democratic. The only reason the Dems have control (by only one seat) is that independent caucus with the Dems. One of those independents is Joe Lieberman who on several occasions has threatened to go caucus with the GOP effectively giving them control.
Also, the Dems in the House has passed an enormous amount of progressive legislation. Most of which has been blocked by Mitch McConnell.
Have the Dems been as effective as they should have been? No. But let's stop repeating MSM talking points that only help the GOP.
Outstanding post John. I tend to believe, however, that the only way we will achieve the objectives you articulate is through a third party. How many more years must we alternate between two parties whose only difference is the corporate benefactors they bear allegiance to? As your post demonstrates, the opposition party has been completely impotent in addressing the concerns of the majority. IMHO, progressives need a party that represents the "common good." The current power structure will never allow progressives to have a voice in policy until they become substantial enough to influence elections. As has been demonstrated throughout the 2008 campaign, these voices have been stifled by the DLC and the complicit leadership of Pelosi and Reid; not to mention the leading presidential contenders for the Democratic Party. You may notice that real progressives, like Dennis Kucinich, receive very little positive notice, even on HuffPo.
I disagree profoundly that sudden withdrawal from Iraq will only result in chaos. Chaos is what we already have BECAUSE we are there. The civil war in Iraq will continue in our absence, but we won't have our finest being needlessly slaughtered by staying the course of the dick-tater. The Demopublicans have abjectly failed the voters. Now, lets change our voter registrations to unaffiliated, as 30% have done, and leave the Republicrats and Demopublicans to their intra-party squabbles. This country can be great again when we return to the path of true democracy and constitutional rule of law.
John, I can't help but think that the way we fund our political races makes it practically impossible for Congress to represent the people they were elected to serve.
The Constitution requires the House of Representatives to meet once in December. What if we pulled every representative from the marshes of D.C. and made them do all of their work and voting from their home districts?
That could help place the fatal blow on K-Street influence as much as anything. Unless and until we remove the weighted factor of cold hard cash from politics the people will always be an afterthought.
Have you considered a run at Congress yourself?
John,
I hope that as a tribute to all those who beleve
in the Constitution, have or are fighting in
wars, those who have died and surely will die
in the days to come, that the Democrats in
Washington act as of January 2008. Waiting
for a new President may be suicidal in more
ways than one.
I surely agree that a "Progressive party" is one of the goals that many Liberals and Progressives can ultimately agree on, but as a "third" party, I'm not so sure.
Let's put a stake through the heart of the Neo-Con, Religious Right, Moral Majority Republican Party, and get it buried with the coffin nailed shut first!
Virtually ALL of their policies and ideologies are proven FLAWED! G.W. was the "godsend" of the Reagen Right. A continuation of "DADDIES" and "UNCLE RONS" ideas and ambitions, and it has led the Nation to the brink of RUINATION!
Once we can get that basic realization imprinted on the American Psyche', THEN we can look to what to replace the former Republican Party with.
In the meantime, by all means, VOTE DEMOCRATIC, and when possible VOTE FOR THE MOST PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATE AVAILABLE. Get the pretenders out of the Party and replace them with TRUE PROGRESSIVES! Maybe we won't need a third party at all (other than the remnants of the Republican Party that will still draw out the 27% who still believe that everything is "okey dokey" in the world at present).
Oh, and while you are busy whining about the failures of the Dems in congress, please explain the house passing the RESTORE ACT, an entirely acceptable renewal of the FISA act.
Bush's criminal and warrantless spying on Americans is one of the most glaring of his infractions against the constitution. The house passed the right bill.
But I don't expect a bunch of Puritans to give any credit.
Hey, Sparky,
Rumsfeld stepped down in '06, but why let the facts get in the way?
Like the concept that the Democrats have a majority in the senate. Not true. What we accomplished in the '06 election was to deny the Republicans their majority.
Currently, for all practical purposes, the senate is split 50-50.
Thanks to the spineless opportunism of Leiberman, the Dems have 51 members in their caucus, which gives us "control" of the senate.
I'm pretty satisfied with the fact that, against all odds, we won all the even remotely vulnerable seats in the senate. NOBODY believed that we could take all six. I'm good with achieving all that was achievable in the '06 election, and I look to the next cycle to win as many as eight more.
I'll try to address your last three comments in one shot.
Switching from attacking Liberals, to attacking Democratics, is nothing we haven't seen. It's funny actually that the Democratic that you attack , is often seen by Liberals as "not Liberal enough"! As for California being a "wacky" state and "on another planet" as viewed by the rest of the country, I would suggest that the majority of the Country finds it no more incomprehensible than Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, or Florida (to name but a few).
Your "PORK" comment is completely false based on the fact that under the Democratic House ALL earmarks were fully documented and publicly available, and in the Senate it was the Republicans who prevented the same changes from being made. Earmarks under this Congress were 1/2 what they had been under the Republican led Congress.
Please cite the rating for Congress that you claim. Preferably from some reputable source.
I think most of America knows WHO has been stonewalling and has prevented the CHANGE that was expected by the majority of voters who elected this Congress. You can lump it into a single "approval" rating, but I expect that when the polls open we will likely see a change of a large number of Republican held seats, and a few of the Democratic. The difference is likely to be that the Republicans will be voted out, and the Democratic candidates will be replaced with other Democratic candidates.
Conservative ideology is, quite simply, a "dog that will not hunt" to use a friend of mines saying. I think all but about 26% of the American people have come to recognize that.
Sorry folks, the skunk can't change his stripe nor his smell! Oh, by the way 'realitytrumpsbull' Karma may get run over by the Dogma.
Since the DLC DEM leadership made a "DEAL" not to impeach,
Bush is now completely outside any law.
What do the Dems get in exchange for this "DEAL" to subvert the constitution? Has Bush honored his side of the "DEAL"? Was funding the war part of the DEAL?
Can somebody tell the details of the DEAL to betray the American voters?
Kucinich? Wexler? Do you know the details of the DEAL? It's stopping your impeachment bill.
Why the DLC breaks our hearts to appeal to the 24%'er's is beyond me. "How to reduce Dem voter turnout" is the DLC's favorite book.
The DLC actually believes in this strategy of alienate your base? Discourage base turnout?
The next President will be in a terrible position and is likely to serveonly one term. The condition we are in will require great change not only in Foreign policy, but finances as well. If the 2006-2007 performance is any indication, the Dem winner and Congress will be unwilling to make the choices necessary to right the ship. Rather (politics as usual) the focus will be on maintaining control through reelection.
If a viable independent party is to emerge, their focus should be towards 2012. Not only will this allow time for "getting it together", but also to secure funding.
Great post, it certainly mirrors my concerns.
With Senators like Feinstein, we do not have a majority!
Weak leadership will continue to plague us in 2008. We don't have a chance without a new speaker and a new Senate leader. Hopefully there will be a few more like Chris Dodd who will show a little courage as the election approaches.
Thanks for putting it out there. The D leadership will just blame the 3rd party candidate again. Blaming others and pleading helplessness is their default response - the worst downer for anyone looking for change.
It's wrong to impeach purely for political reasons and Dems will be accused of this if they move ahead. But it's far worse NOT to impeach simply because it's politically risky, when there is such evidence for it and when the future of the US as a democratic nation of laws is at stake.
Republicans know which buttons to push and those buttons (unpatriotic, soft on terror, flip-flopping) will work even better during election year. It's too late to start filibustering now. Time to chop at the root of this poisonous weed of an Executive.
Our best long term hope is in a 3-rd Progressive Party b/c as the writer points out, the Dems just will not stand for principles. So let us be determined to let the Dem party go into oblivion and form a truly principled Progressive Party. Yes the repigs may benefit but only in the short term as we build a party that 70% of Americans can support, trust and rely on for the future of our country. Yes, it will be hard but we must persevere.
Don't count on the Democrats to live up to their promises. That's an easy one. But it raises another concern. If the people you elect to Congress won't make change despite their promises, what about the presidential candidates? Democrats have already proven unsteady and unreliable, the presidents are no different.
Might want to check again with that 70% figure. Disagreement with President Bush doesn't mean the people are behind Congress.
John, thanks again.
it isn't political fear. it is plutocracy.
it isn't about liberal, conservative, red or blue. it is about who gets the money and why.
our ponzy scheme federal reserve, lobby, crooked representatives and managed markets (not free markets) result in our continued corporate fascism through the military-industrial complex, healthcare complex, and banking cartel.
the problem is much bigger and broader than Dems vs. Repubs.
peace
cpt moonbat
Dear John:(LOL)
I think you'll find that people regardless of
political stripe tend to be fairly well immersed
in their own political dogma, and what you
have to do is make sure that your personal
karma is strong enough to turn that dogma
into political street pizza(no actual dogmas
were harmed during the writing of this screed,
so don't turn me in to the ACLU, or the ASPCA,
for that matter).
We live in Interesting Times, when it sure does
look like we're shaping up for The Mother Of
All Resource Wars. Hawk or dove, the common
issue dew jewwwr is energy. We're not very
'gooder' at producing our own, so the companies
that deal the Good Stuff down at the filling
station decided to yammer and hammer and press
until, voila, our military is basically cemented
into Iraq for all perpetuity. Nice one, Exxon.
Well, actually, not really nice, and there's
A Big Stack Of Dead Bodies thanks to their
corporate beneficience, and lots of unquestioning loyalists willing to pull triggers
as long as the money's right. Hmmm. Unquestioning loyalists. Their own private
army. That Blackwater thing again. Hmmm...
My view on the whole thing hasn't changed,
I think that Congress, as a body, needs to
stand up and ask this administration for the
keys. To sum it up in a word, say it with me,
call for 'impeachment'. That's what you do
in the case of high crimes and misdemeanors.
Wexler's gathering names by the day, probably
by the hour, and here's another cool website
with the exact same purpose in mind:
http://www.impeachbush.org
End the war profiteering, and throw the oil
boys out of office. Bring our troops home,
and let Congress have a field day. Waxman
deserves a medal, as far as I'm concerned.
First of all, Democrats only have a real majority in the House, and even then we have to contend with those Blue Dogs that the DLC so skillfully picked who are really Repub-lites. The majority in the Senate is way too thin to be an effective majority that would lead us to reasonably expect the changes we hoped for in the mid-terms of 2006. You do have a valid point with regards the leadership, though I am not convinced that their failure to actually lead is due entirely to lack of courage. I think that in addition to the Stockholm Syndrome they apparently suffer from, the leadership seriously lacks the knowledge and ability to use the tools of the parliamentary process to get anything done in view of the thin margins they have. I think Harry and Nancy and Steny are the perfect example of the Peter Principle and that what needs to happen is the members must get up the courage to oust them in favor of someone with passion who knows how to use the powers of their leadership positions. Of course, since we of the Democratic Party allowed the DLC mindset to get so entrenched, I don't have high expectations for 2008 to be much different from 2007.
Amen!They better get it done or pack their bags.There is NO EXCUSE for this madness to continue.
For me one of the lessons from 2007 is don't count on the Democratic Party to stand for principles.
They had a chance to end the war and impeach bush and cheney for their crimes and did neither.
Their only anti-war candidate, Kucinich, is polling around one percent.
The Democrats are more concerned about 'electability' rather than principles.
Loading comments…
The McCain campaign implied on Wednesday that Barack Obama's commitment...
Before the largest crowd of his campaign, Democratic presidential contender Barack...
When Katie Couric told Haaretz that "The glory days of TV news...
There is one more John McCain gaffe that...
As we have observed throughout the last several years,...
In a flagrant political act, the State Department has...
**UPDATE 7/25** ThinkProgress now reports that the bar...
** Update below: Nas delivers Fox petition to Stephen...
BARCELONA, Spain — Christian Bale swept into Barcelona on Wednesday night to attend a...
If you're wondering about the recent articles claiming that a study found...
HOUSTON — A "dead zone" in the Gulf of Mexico off...
WASHINGTON — Rescue legislation sailed through the House on Wednesday aimed at...
Posted December 29, 2007 | 11:25 AM (EST)