What is wrong with these Democrats?

[_ed_]

Below is the list of Democrats who voted for John Roberts. I'm simply amazed. If you look at this from a purely political standpoint, this should be the ideal time for Democrats to stand up against the Bush machine. Bush's approval rating is in the tank, we're in the aftermath of the Katrina debacle, Delay just got indicted, Rove is in trouble, Frist is in hot water, the economy sucks, gas prices are atrocious, the War in Iraq is a total mess, etc, etc, etc...

What will it take for our party to stand up against the Republicans? I'm sickened by this vote today. The Republicans voted in lockstep - the Democrats look by comparison weak, unorganized, and the names below all look like they are too afraid of political fallout to vote the right way. And as I said above, THIS IS THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY TO GO ON THE OFFENSIVE!!!

I've already contacted Senator Salazar, on of my Senators, about this. I think it's incumbent upon all of us to let these Senators know that this is totally unacceptable. I told Salazar to switch his party affiliation. He might as well, given his record.

Sorry for this rant. I just don't know what to say. Heaven help the next person that calls here asking for money for the DNC. They won't get a dime from me until they start acting like a party of opposition.



Baucus (D-MT)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feingold (D-WI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Wyden (D-OR)

[knowbody0]

1. Murray really pisses me off.

[katinmn]

2. How do you spell sell-out? D-I-N-O

[napi21]

3. I'm not trying to make excuses for them, but I suspect they voted

for Roberts because they believed he was about as good as they would get in a Shrub nominee. I don't know about Roberts. I don't think anybody really does for sure. I do know there were a lot worse candidates on Shrub's short list though. I'm shuddering when I think about who he'll nominate next. I'm very afraid it';ll be Owens or Brown.

[agingdem]

22. No...

they voted for Roberts because they think they don't lose anything with Roberts replacing Rehnquist.

[agingdem]

4. Time to do something about this!

If all our guys understand is money then...no more money! To our "esteemed" Democratic senators I say...UNTIL YOU GROW A SPINE...NOT ONE DAMN DIME"!

[_ed_]

5. Amen

That's what the next person is going to hear when they call here.

[tx_dem41]

6. Kewl...another Dem bashing thread!!!

What would DU be without one??

Well, maybe a more constructive place for one...but I digress.

[nonconformist]

7. Being constructive is voicing our displeasure when they do something

we, their base, disagree with. How else will they know they have to change? That's being constructive. Being an apologist or acting like everything is hunky-dory isn't constructive in the least.

[tx_dem41]

10. On an internet forum?

Puhleeze.

[nonconformist]

14. DU gets a lot of attention.

Besides, we are a group of democrats that DISCUSS things. Why can't we discuss being upset? You're contradicting yourself - you claim that we aren't being "constructive" enough and when someone points out that THIS IS constructive you claim that it's irrelevant since this is a message board.

[jsamuel]

18. Would you rather us be freepers and kiss their feet?

Of course not, but we can't bash either...

Therefore, criticism is a GREAT thing.

I think this vote was very calculated. The main DLCers voted NO and some of the main libs voted yes. I think this was on purpose. They are trying not to piss us off, but still vote for him. Trying to oppose Bush, but still vote for him.

I have to admit, it is a reminder of the Iraq War vote. Except Kerry voted No.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

88. Which completely undermines the thrust of your original post.

[Qibing Zero]

8. What's constructive about ignoring the fact that a lot of them are hacks?

The majority of our reps, regardless of party, are nearly completely removed from the people. Now this may not be the best issue to 'bash' them on (like the war issue should be), but it's certainly one worth discussing.

[tx_dem41]

12. Any issue to club them over the head with.

Just vote Republican and get it over with.

[jus_the_facts]

15. With *dems* like these we might as well have....

:eyes:

[tx_dem41]

23. Unbelievably, naive statement.

If you don't see the difference between a Sen. Landrieu and a potential Sen. Jindal, then I don't see how you call yourself a liberal/progressive.

[Qibing Zero]

61. You stood up as your country was falling to fascism and said:

'Well, I'd rather have a DNVPer than another Nazi'

[tx_dem41]

70. Naivete and hyperbole.

Impressive. :eyes:

[Qibing Zero]

74. And I'd counter that you're the naive one,

content with everything that's going on now. Does that help the situation we're in?

[tx_dem41]

77. "Content"

Interesting...I'll have to check on that. :eyes:

[Qibing Zero]

20. Oh ffs...

The world isn't black and white, nor is the fact that we constantly are having to deal with people who don't support the people representing us, reality.

[tx_dem41]

25. You seem to believe the world is black and white.

Let's see...one vote...throw the bums out! Seems pretty black and white to me!

[agingdem]

27. If it were only one vote!

oh where to start...bankruptcy bill, energy bill, patriot act, CAFTA, medicare bill, drilling in ANWAR, the Iraq debacle (Biden, Lieberman, etc), no child left behind...need I go on?

[tx_dem41]

29. pssst...check voting records.

And then tell me that you might as well have a Republican in office. I know, it takes a little digging...but, exert a little effort.

[_ed_]

36. So,

I should call Senator Salazar and thank him profusely for not voting with the Republicans all the time? Gee, thanks Salazar... you're not totally subverting the ideals of your own party and constituents. Keep up the good work!

[tx_dem41]

39. Did I say you should do that?

I guess you are looking at things in black and white . Denounce or praise? Be constructive, informed and realistic and look for the shades of gray.

[_ed_]

42. I disagree

This was an opportunity for our party to stand up, together, and tell George Bush that John Roberts and his ilk are unacceptable. I think these Senators opened the door for another right-wing fanatic to be nominated to replace O'Connor.

[tx_dem41]

44. And, I disagree.

I think they did the exact opposite.

[_ed_]

46. How so?

[tx_dem41]

51. I could ask the same of you.

In politics, you get one shot every once in awhile to stop a nomination. Why? Because the general public tunes out of the whole process unless you can make an obvious case a la Bork. Regardless of how valid you consider your feelings re: Roberts, the general public did not see anything to be concerned about. Why ruin your chance at the next nominee (Rogers-Brown? Alberto?) by fighting a losing battle.

[_ed_]

56. I think standing up

for what's right is more important. I guess we'll leave it there. I understand your argument of political expediency, but I just don't agree with it, although I can understand why politicians do it. I don't think it's right, and I wish our elected leaders did what was right instead of what they thought would "look good."

[tx_dem41]

57. Fine...then welcome to a Senate with 75 Republicans.

Tell me, when was the Democratic Party ever ideologically pure...to your ideals?

[_ed_]

62. You're right...

"Fine...then welcome to a Senate with 75 Republicans."

That's what we had today.

[tx_dem41]

65. Whatever

Now...can you answer my question?

[_ed_]

67. Your question is irrelevant

Why can't we hope that our elected leaders will stand up now? They never were ideologically pure in the past. Remember how Kerry got hammered for voting for the war?

[tx_dem41]

69. There you go with the Republican talking points from last year...

when did Kerry vote for the war? That was a line right from King KKKarl himself. You've been conditioned well.

[_ed_]

71. I'm done

When you start with personal insults, you show your true colors. Have a nice life.

[tx_dem41]

76. Don't use Republican talking points then. n/t

[agingdem]

48. I'm tired of gray...

I'm tired of "I was for it before I was against it"...yes/no, right/wrong...black/white...what's not to understand?

[_ed_]

50. Right On!

[tx_dem41]

54. If you're tired of it, you've chosen the wrong avocation in politics!

:)

[agingdem]

63. We've become a party of...

"maybe", "sort of" "not entirely", "they have a point", "next time". What's wrong with "never again"?

[tx_dem41]

68. If you feel that way....

maybe you should look for a third party. And, I mean that not to be mean, but sincerely. Cynicism eats at a person. Don't let it happen to you.

[agingdem]

75. I'm a Dem...

that's my party, but I think the senate Dems have become their own third party...they left me...I didn't leave them. I want our guys to stop rolling over and playing dead.

[Qibing Zero]

52. The reality is that we're talking about yes or no votes here.

The black and white comments were toward you thinking it was either 'hardcore republican' or 'ever turning toward the right democrat', take it or leave it.

Things can change, but in our current system, our reps vote yes or no, and we either agree or disagree with their vote. Is it wrong to disagree, or what?

You're turning this into really twisted logic here. What's your stance?

[tx_dem41]

64. Personally, I would have voted nay...quite easily.

But I'm not running for re-election in any of those states. And, I don't represent the people of any of those states.

[Qibing Zero]

73. Doesn't your service to the greater good of the country...

..outweigh not only what the majority of the people believe, but your political career as well? Should the fact that 49% of the people that voted for you disagree with you make your decisions in congress 51% democrat and 49% republican?

Did the fact that the majority of the American people didn't vote for bush in his first term stop him from representing interests of the minority that holds his opinions? Does it stop him now, when the vast majority of America disagrees with how he's handling things all over?

We're living in an age where the government picks and chooses what information it wants the people to have. This is beyond base politics.

[paulk]

49. yes, you should

because, you're right, he hasn't voted for the Republicans all the time. Unlike the guy he beat (Coors) would have...

[_ed_]

53. That's not why I voted for him

And that's not how he ran. I feel betrayed by him.

I don't think we should settle for "Coors Light" (and sorry for the terrible pun)

[paulk]

82. it is how he ran, though

he ran as a centrist Democrat...


that's what he is and that's what it takes to win a state wide race in Colorado as a Democrat right now. If the state moves to the left by picking up another seat in the House in 2006, hopefully Salazar will move more to the left also. He's got five more years; don't give up on him yet... poco a poquito...

Don't forget Bush won this state last year.

[agingdem]

38. Listen...

I live in Texas...I've seen first hand the Bush destruction...I have donated lots a money, knocked on lots of doors. My parents were Holocaust survivors...I know fascism. Do I want a Republican in office...come on! But I want our guys to fight for us...not for their corporate sponsors.

[tx_dem41]

41. I understand....you and I have similar backgrounds (except for the parents

)...I respect the frustration and share it. I also know enough to not make sweeping denunciations (which you acknowledged). Thanks for responding.

[Zodiak]

34. yes, you do

We need to keepsaying it until the betrayals stop. Apparently too many still think about single votes and use the "ideological purity" argument to silence dissent when senators betray the base. The fact is, I have done the research....a GREAT DEAL of our senators betray us more than they vote with us. This isn't about ideology...this is about taking a stand!

I know every vote for a bill that every senator made last year. After that research, I knew which "Side" in the DINO wars on DU was more in the right. It is, once again, the more left position that is correct.

But they never learn...we liberals are just here to jeer at and ignore. When we are proven right, we score no points, only get more ridicule for our next idea. Liberals are truly without a party, and the party that "wants" them only wants their money and passion, not their ideas. And I'm not talking about "free Mumia" liberals...I'm talking about normal liberals who just want a little friggin balance between the small gy and the big guy. Is that too much to friggin' ask!!

The problem with liberals in this country is that we are orphans...beaten like red-headed step children by both sides of the aisle. And one of our parents wants us to kill their ass while they do it!

[_ed_]

32. One vote?

This "one vote" could have rammifications that negatively affect our nation for 30+ years!

So, yes, throw these bums out of office. We need Democrats with a spine.

[agingdem]

40. NOT ONE DAMN DIME!

Money they understand...their constituents they don't.

[tx_dem41]

55. And what you'll end up with is Republicans with no souls at all.

But, I have a feeling you see no difference between the two.

[_ed_]

58. That's very defeatist...

So, we just have to put up with these guys, no matter how often they go against what we believe?

[tx_dem41]

60. Answer me this...

when was the Democratic Party as represented by the politicians ever ideologically pure?

[Qibing Zero]

43. Mmhmm, care to quote where I supposedly said that?

Silly trick, that - trying to throw my logic back at me. It certainly helped you avoid the fact you seem to believe the two parties and their respective lines are the be all end all of politics.

Nah, lets just ignore the fact American politics are being pulled even more to the right every day. All's well in the Democratic Party!

Tell me, is it because you sincerely believe our system is working, or are you just resigned to the belief that we have to 'settle' for what we have?

[agingdem]

9. Oh please...

I'm a 57 year old life-long liberal Democrat...and I'm sick and tired of watching our guys sell out...they have to stand for something and they have to stand together!

[BillZBubb]

13. So, if the Dems keep rolling over we should agree and be happy?

The Dems NEED TO BE BASHED. That is the most constructive thing we can do. Right now we don't have a coherent opposition alternative. We have a bunch of freelancers like those who voted for Roberts.

We need to bash those who continue to make us a minority party. We need to bash those without a backbone. We need to bash those who fail to vote on Democratic values. We need to bash leaders who don't lead.

You might digress, but your point is weak.

[tx_dem41]

16. Please....keep bashing away....

or be constructive, and find better progressives in each of those states that ALSO CAN WIN in the General Primary. Be my guest.

[WA98296]

78. Exactly

[nonconformist]

33. I see you've only been here since Nov 20, 2004.

You would have had a stroke here during the primaries.

Look - we are a political message board. Not a cheerleading board, not a Dem clone of FreeRepublic. We actually hold our leaders accountable, we hold their feet to the fire. That is the difference between us and them. We discuss things that upset us, and we discuss things that please us. Many of the people here are extremely active on a local level, volunteer time and money, write letters to news agencies and politicians, etc. DU is huge and does get a fair share of attention.

We are not perfect. We need to make some changes - we need to hold stronger to our convictions and our party platform, we need to stop taking our base for granted, we need to stop being appeasers and enablers, and we need to change the perception that the democratic party is weak. Because, frankly, that perception is the reality. Strong leadership that stands for what it believes in is what inspires people, and inspiration translates to votes.

Or, conversely, we can just sit around praising people and instead of being critical of their mistakes we can just think of ways to counter the spin and attack anyone who doesn't fall in lockstep. Who does THAT sound like?

[tx_dem41]

37. I appreciate the time you put into your response.

I'm not looking for a cheerleader board where everyone marches in lockstep. I do wish some on this board would do some homework and not make silly statements such as "We might as well just have Republicans in those seats". And, I'm not saying you did.

Again, thanks.

[KnowerOfLogic]

84. Kewl...another ABB, let's lose the next election too thread. nt

[populistdriven]

11. Nelson (D-FL) - Sold us out on Bankruptcy Bill too - he's DLC

I despise these Republicans inside our ranks

[GreenArrow]

17. maybe they were impressed

by his exceptional ability to avoid answering direct questions, and by the White House's refusual to provide pertinent papers. Those two things in tandem, should have been enough to disqualify him right there.

But if twenty something Dems voted to confirm this guy is bad, consider that every single Republican voted for him. Every single one!

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[indigo32]

47. Baucus is from MT not MN

very telling list though.

[Zodiak]

59. Dangit

That's the second time someone has pointed that out,and I still have not changed it. The fact is, I suck at two-letter abbreviations for States, so it is totally my bad.

And why did I do this? Because ADA ratings are useless amendment and procedural vote drivel that only shows the differences between Republicans and Democrats. My method only addresses votes that directly affect the People. 11 in total from last year....and senators that voted against us once still can get a "100" rating. There is no ideological purity standard in this method...I made sure of that.

Just numbers for people to read and weep....if anyone wants, I can email them the Excel file and they can see them all....and use the file to continue to track votes. It is more useful than listening to some of the self-appointed pundits here. Love you guys, but seriously, we need more facts and less rhetoric.

I'll change the abbreviation on my template post-haste...I copy this thing every time that something like this happens. I scored these senators about a month ago, and it sure does put a lot of "typical DU arguments" on both sides to rest.

The full methodology is posted here (in the comments):
http://www.dailykos.com/user/Zodiak%20Ironfist

We really need to have this discussion seriously without the faulty rhetoric. We need to take a serious look at our senators and decide who to cut off from DNC funds, and then pressure the DNC to do it. I think that 5 years of Bush have really shown us which senators only puss out on an issue here and there, and which ones make it a habit of doing to Bush what Monica did for Bill while only giving lip service to Democratic politics.

[The Magistrate]

93. Who Complied The Rating, Mr. Fist?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

21. "What is wrong with them?" you ask?

Why not look at what states they're from first? I think for the vast majority of them, you'll find your answers right there. MT, WV, ND, SD, LA, AR, NE, FL, CO - all states that voted for Bush. I don't think you need to be a brain surgeon to figure this one out.

[agingdem]

26. Think about this...

the Repubs are asking the Dems not to filibuster the next court nominee...that they can even assume that we will agree to this (because they know we're spineless) is galling. Look what our guys have become!

[Zodiak]

28. There are more senators than that

Oregon is blue, Vermont is Blue, Connecticut is blue, Deleware is blue, Washington is blue, and Michigan is blue. This hypothesis only holds water if the reader doesn't bother to check that there are a lot of garish exceptions to this hypothesis.

It's not a DLC thing, either...not entirely. The betrayal is across the board, and for lots of reasons. But it does not excuse the betryal nor does it make it "ok" that we have now set the precedent that you can get a judge on the Supreme court who refuses to answer any question and refuses to have his records released.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

31. Yeah, it's a huge betrayal to make an insignificant vote.

:sarcasm: Considering the vote was never EVER in question, I find it ridiculous to take this seriously.

[Zodiak]

45. Give me a break

What, the media says "Roberts will get in" and our senators follow suit? That's democracy in this country?!?! Do you know why these threads happen all of the time? Because these BETRAYALS happen all of the time...it's disgusting!

Your disingenuous "cherry-pick" argument above indicates that you do not take this discussion seriously at all, so don't give me the sarcastic school-yard bully tactic and then try to put social pressure on me by not "taking me seriously". The same can be said for you.

A vote for "yes" is a rubber-stamp to the BS tactic by which Roberts was foisted upon us, and the vote is ostensibly anti-women's rights. It sets a nasty precedent.

But don't worry....we'll be here in a few weeks running over the same senators who betrayed us again, and you will be here defending them in Machiavellan fashion. And the wheel turns round and round.

Meanwhile, the left is leaving the party. If not in vote, then by lack of funds and feet on the ground. Let's see if Machiavelli has a solution for that. There is only so much abuse the left can take.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

83. The left is leaving the party?

And where are they going to? Hmm? Going to languish in nothingness? Going to move to another country? Where? How many times can "the left" tolerate losing thanks to making meaningless statement votes? When will the left finally learn the simplest amount of political pragmatism? Please tell me what "the left", whom you so arrogantly speak on the behalf of, plans to do to reassume power.

You'll learn eventually that zealotry gets you nowhere. Contrary to what you think, the Republicans didn't assume the majority by being a self-righteous group of zealots. That they have become self-righteous zealots is the reason for the steady downfall.

Today's vote meant NOTHING. Not a goddamn solitary fucking thing. It was never in question at all. I'd rather have our guys take the high road when it doesn't matter so that they can take the low road when it DOES matter. But hey, I'd like to not be in the minority sometime in my life. Maybe that's just me.

[Qibing Zero]

92. Hah, FL is screwed

You'd think we were in Utah or something, never you mind that we're a down to the wire state in elections.

I won't even go into Mel Martinez, and... Bill Nelson is supposed to be liberal?! Mmmhmm.

They're talking about Nelson vs Katharine Harris in 2006. If she wins, I give up what little hope I ever had for Florida (and it was very little, I must say).

[Craig3410]

24. Both of mine. Goddammit. -nt-

[AnnInLa]

30. An astute comment from a TV pundit today

Rarely astute, one pundit (can't remember who) said to check the "yes" Dem voters....they will usually be Dems in RED states who are facing re-election in 2006. Most of the Dems planning to run for President in 2008, voted "no." That is the most telling statistic....that the ones who want to make a run for pres, voted "no" for us, the base. The "yes" voters had to think about their re-election in RED states. Explains a lot.

To the poster above: Yes, you are absolutely correct, there is a HUGE difference between Landrieu and Jindal. She voted "yes" for Roberts, but we MUST have her re-elected in 2006, and that is why she voted "for." There is no other Dem who can beat the Vitter/bushco repuke regime in LA. I wish we had the luxury of being able to elect a liberal Dem in LA, but we don't. Landrieu will do what it takes to get re-elected, and the Dems here will support her in $$ and in effort, because the alternative is a tad unpalatable.

[McCamy Taylor]

35. Hmmm, even divide. Democratic Party--the Party of Free Thinkers!

[Mr_Spock]

66. hehe

...not this again.

I hate Dems! Don't you?

[DS1]

72. They're in it for themselves, just like everyone else in Government

[jus_the_facts]

79. seems we need to be lectured on how WE shouldn't care about their votes...

....they're better than republicans...heh...I can't tell anymore...and I'm wrong for feelin' this way. :eyes:

:hi:

[DS1]

81. I've given up on America

Not a single peep about Tom Delay on the news tonight.

[jus_the_facts]

86. Yeah my cynicism knows no bounds either.......

.....call me a defeatest if you must...s'better than bein' a traitor! ;-)

[question everything]

80. Not worth being angry

He is replacing an extreme RW... cannot be any worse. Better to save the ammunition for the real important battles.

[etherealtruth]

87. Like the next SCOTUS nominee

In the 80's Renquist was handily confirmed for chief justice, some months later the next nominee, Bork, was "Borked".

That vote will matter very much.

[question everything]

90. Yes, indeed.

I think that this was when I started my political involvement. This was 1988 and two or three of the Democratic Presidential candidates were on the Judiciary Committee. Simon and Biden, I think. So I wrote to both and to my two senators asking them to vote against Bork. As I recall, Simon sent back a very nice reply.

Of course, for the RW, Bork is the battle cry for them to retaliate.

[seaglass]

85. Salazar's decision was a lot more thought out than your rant,

whether you agree with his decision or not (and I do not).

Why don't you find out his reasoning and then bash him?

Here's his floor speech.

http://insidedenver.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4113796,00.html

[Cocoa]

89. my good mood is impervious to this divisive crap

Delay, Abramoff, Frist, Bush, Bill Bennett, all in hot water.

Plus the White Sox clinching.

Retread dem bashing doesn't have a prayer.

:bounce:

[NuttyFluffers]

91. my people. feinstein and boxer. this time they both did well.

my sympathies to the rest of you. may you oust them come next year.

[Lecky]

94. My state doesn't even have a Democratic senator :(

I'd take those bottom 5 Democrats over Lindsay Graham and that other fucktard DeMint any day of the week!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

95. nothing really

do you expect to put forward anyone better than roberts?