Corrente

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

We have met the Republicans and they is us

vastleft's picture

OMFG:

The Democratic Congress is more popular with Republicans than with Democrats. I really wonder if this is the first time in modern American history when a Congress is more popular among the opposition party than among the party that putatively controls it. And this was taken before the FISA vote, so Hoyer's Congress is certain to become even more popular among the GOP.
0
No votes yet

Comments

Submitted by jawbone on

take it back to its Lincoln roots, with the really good parts of the Good Government and Progressive movements tossed in....

How could that be done?

Sign up as R's, show up at town and county meetings and have enough votes to get our types in positions of leadership?

Hhhmmmm....

Submitted by lambert on

.... I suppose the executive power thing would work. But then, there's destroying FDR's legacy. But then, everybody wants to do that.

Any conservatives in favor or a truth and reconciliation commission?

[x] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

They're not going anywhere-- What Obama means for business -- "... On the same day that Furman's appointment was announced, Obama told CNBC he might consider deferring some of his tax increases if the economy remains in bad shape. ..."

(and raise your hand if you've ever seen a tax cut reversed in your lifetime)

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

I read that article this morning and it didn't phase me--at all. I don't trust a word he says. This goes beyond healthy suspicion of a politician: if it sounds remotely Democratic or just plain not horrible, I assume he's flat-out lying to me. The only thing I trust is who his advisors and top corporate donors are.

willyjsimmons's picture
Submitted by willyjsimmons on

Obama told CNBC he might consider deferring some of his tax increases if the economy remains in bad shape.

I swear, Barack has more "hits" than the Beatles.

Someone must compile all of Obama's "greatest hits" and release them.

Time Life $19.99 for your first set, $9.99 for each additional volume.

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

Woohoo. We get a bullying crew of A-list bloggers who propagandize just as good as their right-wing brethren thrown in for good measure.

A vote--enthusiastic or "tepid"--for Obama is a vote to sanction all of this. McCain is real bad and all Obama has to do is show that he isn't worse. He's failing miserably.

Submitted by lambert on

Obama's got plenty of time to move me to lukewarm or even warm from tepid. Or to cool or "a cold day in Hell." It's totally up to him.

[x] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

I've gradually been cooling to him since he and Edwards opened up the sexist/misogyny gates late last year. You know, telegraphing their "attacks" to critical acclaim by MSM and A-listers alike. (Make no mistake, Edwards deserves credit for the ensuing nonsense as well.) One let down after another is all I've gotten since.

The GOP makes it such that my bar is low--really, really low--and Obama isn't clearing it at this point. And the fact that an Obama win will only strengthen and reinforce the MSM and the A-listers sure doesn't help much.

Pat J's picture
Submitted by Pat J on

Obama could set me up on a blind date with George Clooney and I still won't vote for him.

And apparently whatever is left of congress's approval rating is reserved for the congressional pages and the ladies room attendants. Worst bunch ever!

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

Isn't anyone else terrified that all the tactics by the Democratic "leadership" in and outside Congress is more dangerous precisely because it's coming from the supposed left? When the "left" joins the right in engaging in everything from exploiting hate to disenfranchisement to casually shredding the Constitution we are at the point of no return.

This is why I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would vote to legitimize it. What does someone with the letter "D" next to their name have to do to convince Democrats they're un-voteable? And how will an arrogant, unqualified, unprincipled empty suit beloved by this "leadership" and a new gang of Chicago boys be anything but a disaster? If one is voting for this "D" because the letter magically represents the "lesser" evil, how does one justify voting to advantage the GOP and divide the left for decades after, all to win one "D" term? What Democratic principle can anyone be reasonably certain Obama will fight for in exchange for your vote?

Eh, don't answer. I know I'm spinning my wheels. If these past several months don't convince people, nothing will. Giving any person, let alone Obama of all people, all that executive power, a paid for Congress, and top-down control of the Party machinery is sufficient for an epic failure.

Submitted by gob on

Things like what you wrote here cause people like me to question their automatic vote-for-the-D stance. As for me, I've abandoned that position as of 10 days ago, for my own reasons as developed by the conversations here and elsewhere.

Submitted by lambert on

... with the prophylactic that "when the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"

I'm not there yet, but Obama crossed the line for me with the RFK smear (though, unlike the Republican aristocracy, Obama doesn't torture animals or treat sex as a form of abuse of power (and vice versa), which really is a difference). Similarly, the Ds crossed one line with the RBC Clusterfuck, and more definitively with the FISA Clusterfuck.

It's like Adam Smith's quote, which I don't remember exactly, that whenever two businessmen meet, they engage in a conspiracy against the public.

Ditto Bipartisanship. FISA? Bipartisan. No clawback of the Bush tax cuts? Bipartisan. And so on.

When the two parties aren't fighting each other, we can be sure that neither party is fighting for us...

[x] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

--that's been a problem for a while--esp in Congress--but always our presidential candidates have had at least some experience and vowed to fight FOR at least some Democratic policies--now it's not so at all.