Why has it been this long, and the elected Dems have done nothing?

[Loonman]

Iraq mess
9/11 commission
Enron's influence
Condi's lies
Powell's lies
$87 billion loan
Halliburton and no-bid contracts for Iraq
Daily KIA count in Iraq



Daschle is doing his silent act. More of "what he said" when Sen. Byrd hangs his ass out to be attacked from the others. Nobody backs Pelosi while she battles Herr DeLay.



WHY AREN'T THEY DOING ANYTHING?

Maybe they haven't really figured out how disillusioned people were and didn't even bother to vote in 2002, because why elect people who don't represent you?

[terrya]

1. Tom Daschle is an honorable man, but...

I just don't think he cuts it as the Democratic leader in the Senate. He's too slow on reacting on things...and sometimes too tentative when he does.

Personally, I'd like to see Senator Kennedy elected as Democratic Leader. Or Tom Harkin.

IMO.

[pippin]

14. how could he be an honorable man

when he's co-opted up to his eye balls by the connections his wife has with all the corporations?

The inaction and/or silence by Democrats is probably because they'r all co-opted one way or another. Pelosi is an absolute disappointment, and the only ones who have spoken up are Conyers, Braun, Kennedy and Byrd. if the others have done so, they have probably been ignored by the media and aren't seen or heard by the rest of the country.

[dbt]

2. Only one possible explanation:

They have been bought off. I used to think that was a joke--and it still is, but now it's on the American people.

:freak:
dbt

[wildmanj]

3. why

the Democrats are Bush Lite & PNAC Lite---don't hold your breath for the Democrats to do anything more or less than the MONEY THAT HAS BOUGHT AND PAID FOR THEM---time for a new party

[AP]

4. Considering Dems don't control a single branch of gov't, I think they...

...are doing pretty well.

They're standing up to the worst of the judicial nominees, and, without having the right to call any investigations in Congress, they're doing a nice job of keeping some issues which hurt Bush in the forefront (and they're doing it through the presidential campaign).

[Hep]

5. To quote Aaron SOrkin

They're so busy trying to KEEP their jobs that they're forgetting to DO their jobs.

[mikehiggins]

8. Lack of leaders

The problem is that there are no leaders in the Democratic ranks. They are like a herd of cats, and nobody wants to play Siegried and Roy. None of them really want to lead, they just want to survive.

The Repugs have the hunger, the Dems don't.

[TimeLord]

31. Sad but true...n/t

[NewGuy]

12. BINGO!!

They need to be told that the way to keep your job is to fight what is wrong and not just sit there and vote yourself a pay raise every year.

Our party needs to stand for something. And they need to stand tall.

[artr2]

6. Can you say corporate whore?

I knew you could. When you take money from corporations & wealthy individuals you have to play their game. So, they are only doing on what they have paid to do. Roll over, play dead & bend over on COMMAND. It's time for the grass roots to take our party back And it's time to take the country back

[library_max]

21. Let's put this "corporate whore" thing to bed.

Remember, campaign contributions aren't something a candidate can put into his or her pocket. They're not getting rich off corporate donations. The important thing about corporate donations (or any donations) is that they help a candidate get elected and reelected.

Now, if Democrats could get elected and reelected to office without corporate money, why wouldn't they do it? If the fantasy that America is thirsting to move leftward were true - if a "grassroots movement" to "take our party back" would result in more Democrats in office rather than a lot fewer - don't you think professional pols and their campaign pros would pick up on it? They only benefit if they get elected.

It's common sense that Democrats take corporate contributions and moderate their political stances because that's what it takes to get elected in the current political climate. The only alternative is that it's some grand conspiracy with the DNC and professional Dem politicians nationwide conspiring to move the national agenda to the right, at the cost of remaining out of power and, in many cases, unemployed. Where's their motive?

We want Democrats to get elected, because the only alternative is more Republicans. Hence, we need to stop hating them for doing what they have to do. If you don't like the rules, change the rules, but you don't get to change the rules until your party is in power. First things first, and the first thing is to get Democrats elected.

[CWebster]

26. that is hilarious.

This is a joke, right?

[Hep]

28. I agree wholeheartedly

It's regrettable that the political system had turned out this way, but it isn't going to stop until enough people care about it to elect people who will change it.

But given all of the other issues this country is facing right now, how can we reasonable expect people to make this a priority?


This issue is going to linger for a long time. I seriously think it's pointless to try to fight it.

[CWebster]

29. Are you serious?

The entire mission of the DLC was to go more corporate at the expense of eveything the party has stood and fought for. What do you think the groundswell of grassroots support of Dean is a reaction to? Why do you suppose the Green party has become a greater threat to the Democratic party than the Republican one has? Why do you suppose our elected officials have either laid down, put up faint and limited resistance, offered no vocal organized challenges, and threw no support to those who did, failed to pursue countless opportunities to nail Bush and his cronies, often following strategy supporting and "standing shoulder to shoulder" along with Bush... Daschle and Pelosi actually worked behind the scene to gut Mccain-Feingold. This is the rotten heart at the core....surely I misinterpreted the sentiment and misread the post you respond to.

[library_max]

30. Suppose we accept your interpretation of events

And it's not the only possible interpretation, not by a long shot.

But suppose we accept it. What, then, would be the motive for Daschle, Pelosi, et al? The joy of being called "corporate whores" with "rotten hearts" by people like you?

I say that the party is doing what it has to do to survive at all. Money talks in the current political system. As long as Buckley vs. Valejo (the ridiculous decision that money is somehow speech) stands, we're going to have to make the best of it. And if you concede that accepting corporate money and some compromise facilitates Democrats staying in office, why is that bad? - since the only alternative is more Republicans.

I suppose some would cheer for the idea of letting the Democratic Party die and make room for the Greens. But the Greens would be a less-than-ten-percent party with or without the Democrats. A party that can't get its candidates elected to office in significant numbers is irrelevant.

[TimeLord]

32. I can. And I agree with you artr2. n/t

[artr2]

7. dupe

dupe

[DuctapeFatwa]

9. They depend on the same companies for their campaign money

The situation really goes beyond Republican and Democrat.

Republican and Democrat are about letting people think they have a choice, kind of like telling a little kid,

Would you rather have your liver in a red or a blue dish?

It will still be liver in the dish, and until you take it out, wash the dishes, and put something good in them, it will continue being liver.

[TimeLord]

33. Exactly DuctapeFatwa,

Couldn't agree more. It's time for a real change.

[radwriter0555]

10. Like WHAT? How in HELL do you battle GOP mafiosa-like thugs, liars,

cheats and thieves in such epic proportions?

What solutions do YOU have?

[Uzybone]

11. What are they supposed to be doing

Some (Kennedy, Bryd etc) make speeches as often as possible blasting this charade of an admin. Many vote against the crap Bush proposes. They are not in the majority so they cant really stop anything. Can you propose things they should be doing but are not?

[leesa]

13. Um, because they are the ultra wealthy and they are part of it??

Just a guess.

[library_max]

15. They have to pick their fights.

They're trying to pick fights they can win, like over the nuttier judicial nominations. If all of them scream and cry about every stupid thing the Republicans try to do, we'll be nationally known as the party of screamers and cryers. Ordinary people who don't understand politics have a very limited tolerance for "aginners" who are never for anything. And of course, when your party doesn't control the White House or either branch of Congress, you don't get to set the agenda or propose things to be "for."

There's nothing wrong with the Democrats that wouldn't be fixed by getting them the White House and majorities in the houses of Congress.

[Terwilliger]

16. too bad they lost all of those things

maybe they should get some new strategy

[Lydia Leftcoast]

18. Maybe you don't get to SET the agenda

but it looks as if they don't even have one that they would set if they got into power.

They're in danger of becoming like the minority parties in Japan, who rail and vote against the policies of the LDP but who have proven themselves incapable of governing on the rare occasions when they have gained a majority, because they've been defining themselves as the un-LDP rather than coming up with positive, workable agendas of their own.

The Dems need to get together, set a simple, workable agenda that is NOT merely a reaction to the Republicans, and have all their elected officials push it relentlessly on trips to their home districts.

If Senators and Congresscritters want press coverage in their home districts, they usually get it. Say the Dems came up with a simple, workable plan to save Social Security. The elected officials would then make sure that they talked it up to everyone they saw on their visits home: the press, community groups, even people in the airport lobby.

This sitting back helplessly and saying, "We can't set the agenda because we're not in power" is bullshit.

If we can't work through established channels, then we have to establish new channels.

[CWebster]

17. Hey, they threw a bone.

Bush got to loot the treasury, so long as Democrats got some relief for the middle-class swing voters they limit their catering to.

[OldSoldier]

19. If you'd have received a pouch of anthrax in the mail...

you'd shut up too.

You know that's why they did it. Don't kid yourself.

They sent anthrax to the senate minority leader, the minority leader of the judicial committee, and to the last non-whore publisher in America. That's not coincidence. (Okay, American Media got the envelope because they had the balls to run a photo of an underage Jenna Bush rolling around on the floor, and they figured that since they'd savaged the Clintons for so long, pResidents and their families were fair game.)

Now the Enquirer is screamingly pro-Bush and Daschle and Leahy don't say shit. Exactly the results they were looking for.

[Clete]

20. That's because we need to start electing some other DEMS.

When your car doesn't work anymore you replace it.

[sangh0]

22. You're kidding right

A day doesn't go by without several Dems criticizing Bush* over Iraq

A week doesn't go by without several Dems criticizing Bush* over the 9/11 investigation

A day doesn't go by without several Dems criticizing Bush* and his cabinet about the lies they've been tellinh

A day doesn't go by without several Dems criticizing Bush* over the $87billion

A day doesn't go by without several Dems criticizing Bush* over the deaths in Iraq

[KG]

34. you're so right!

some of those dems even raised there voices and shook there finger at whistle ass! it's was inspiring, i tells ya!

[livinontheedge]

23. If the media act like scared kittens, what do you expect our leaders to do

If the media would get behind Dachle, they would rip Bush to shreds.

[maggrwaggr]

24. they need to do a media filibuster

just every day, don't shut up about it. make it like a broken record. Over and over and over until it gets out there.

But they don't do it.

We have no leadership.

[Redleg]

25. Remember that Dems do not control either house of Congress.

What are they supposed to make happen? The best they can do is tell the media what they feel. Some have diligently done so, others have not. When they request documents from the administration they get stonewalled. I agree with you to some extent that more of them need to yell from battlements. I also believe the media is downplaying and derogating many of the outcries by the Dems. A lot of it doesn't make front page news.

[sandnsea]

27. You need different news sources

I'm sick of hearing this shit. If you don't know what they're saying and doing, you're just not paying attention. Or you're only paying attention to groups with their own agenda who rip apart everything the 'establishment' does.