Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

I think I finally figured out why the Ds will continue to suck forever

Remember that little twerp Ilya Sheyman? The Obama lifer and MoveOn weasel who pissed away a lot of "progressive" money and got slaughtered by a D regular in IL-10? Here's why Our Ilya thinks -- or at least says -- he lost:

1) Late Money and Who Is the Progressive ....
2) Astonishingly [why, one can only wonder?] Low Voter Turnout....
3) Last Minute Smear Campaigns Work...

Notice a common thread here?

It's not Ilya's fault.

And that's the fallback position of all Democratic partisans: IT'S ALWAYS SOMEBODY ELSE'S FAULT. Nader. Mean Republicans. The ignorance and stupidity of others. The racism of others. The hatred of others.

No capacity whatever, it seems, for self-examination. That's why Ds suck, and will continue to suck, in exactly the same way, forever, because a display of adaptability begins with self-examination and the acceptance of failure. This is the cultural and sociological manifestation of the iron law of institutions.

UPDATE Democrats can never fail. They can only be failed.

0
No votes yet

Comments

coyotecreek's picture
Submitted by coyotecreek on

...when it comes to Michigan Democrats.

"The issue revolves around whether or not there should have been immediate effect of the various laws. I have to be honest and say the first thing that came to my mind when I read that the Michigan Democrats were filing a lawsuit to force roll call votes on immediate effect was to wonder why it took a year for these folks to find the time to loudly complain. In other words, why did Michigan Democratic legislators wait while so many terribly damaging pieces of legislation were immediately implemented before hopping up and down and sending out press releases about the lack of roll call votes?"

http://www.a2politico.com/2012/04/immedi...

Think Liberally's picture
Submitted by Think Liberally on

My first thought on seeing Maddow's story was, where were the Dems? For a year!? The link in your post makes the point that these Dems are putting up a show of fighting now in order to be able to get reelected on the outrage over these events. Without having to, y'know, actually fight them. Much like the national Dems in 2006 and 2008 got elected on the perception that they would end the war. Without, y'know, having to actually do it.

Reminds me of the stories about Obama and gay marriage. All the "liberal" sites I read frame it as, Obama has to be pragmatic in order to win. As opposed to, y'know, Obama being a typical politician and a scoundrel and a liar.

It's all whether you continue to give them the benefit of the doubt. If there's just one thing this site has done, it's give me the idea and the (self-)permission to no longer extend that to the Dems.

Submitted by JuliaWilliams on

They are wed to the sclerotic unions and anti-war and other local groups that believe they are still relevant, without, yannow, actually doing anything remotely populist or assertive, and essentially serving as apologists for whatever FU's were in office that had the D after their name. For example, at the Lansing protests last fall, the UAW was conspicuous by its absence, (but other, smaller, unions were there, like transit, electrical, etc, and most prominently, the MNA-Michigan Nurses Association). During one action, on a nice day, the Obama tablers were very much visible, but had not organized or participated in the action otherwise (the template for co-optation of Occupy). But, interestingly, I first saw this article posed by MI-Uncut, and may reflect a slow awakening of our betrayal. (One can only hope).

RanDomino's picture
Submitted by RanDomino on

When pointing out that they also lost 2004, I've gotten "It's not MY fault the party picked someone boring!"
So it's not even about the party being unable to do wrong... it's about avoiding personal moral culpability. As long as it's not MY fault, I don't know, I get into Heaven? These people need an intervention.

also, don't know if you saw on that thread on nakedcapitalism, but I found the training documents for the MoveOn Co-Opt-A-Thon "99% Spring training". The actual training is pretty good, ironically, but the real purpose is to get people emotionally invested for this "six weeks of action" through the end of May- a series of pointless protests which they putrescently call "Direct Action".

Also, I got an e-mail from MoveOn that gives the game away-
"Dear MoveOn member,

Q. What's the most important moment this year—maybe this decade—that no one's talking about?

A: December 31, when 1.1 trillion dollars in tax breaks for the rich will expire and force a major re-jiggering of our tax code

...

This is a fight we have to win. Which means we need to make fair taxes an issue every day between now and December, make sure the election is a referendum on taxing the 1%—and that it goes our direction."

So after the "six weeks of (in)action" they intend to put people to work electing Democrats as a "referendum".
I can't see this not backfiring for them. Do they think people are that stupid? ahh but then again that is their entire rationalization for why people don't vote for Democrats...

Submitted by brucedixon on

But I'd better not. Personal/professional relationships and all. Maybe I can save some exemplary details to lay on fictional characters in a book yet to be written.

tom allen's picture
Submitted by tom allen on

But Democrats stand for --- uh. Just a sec. I've got it here.

*ruffles through cards* "Not quite so bad as Republicans!" Huh, not good? Let's try, "Lower taxes for corporations!" "Pivot to the deficit!" "More wars in Asia!" "Grand Bargain." "Strip searches for everyone!" "Wall Street? They're great guys!"

Dang it, why aren't these slogans working?