Boxer would not have stood without the consent of the leadership

[cali]

That's just the way it works folks. You should understand that today was a well orchestrated plan on the part of the dems. And with very few exceptions, you can bet that most of the CBC is fine with what happened today.

[FreepFryer]

1. right on, Cali. :)

[lastknowngood]

2. Big deal they were just throwing us a bone. The "leadership"

of this party doesn't exist. They are just wimps if this is a "big" deal when we have a war criminal leading our country and fradulant elections and only one "safe seat" senator can stand to hell with them.

[FreakinDJ]

4. Agreed...shape up or ship out

If the DNC thinks they can rely on our vote as the lesser of 2 evils just wait until they wake up and realise being 3rd sucks even worse

[mattclearing]

18. .

:puke:

[genius]

3. She stood up over the oppostion of the leadership. But she had the people

behind her. What were they going to do to openly stop her-throw away any chance for a position as dog catcher after we kick their rear ends out of Congress.

[cali]

6. That's just baloney

and not how the Senate works. Had she not had the backing of Reid and others, there wouldn't have been a challenge.

[incapsulated]

5. I Agree

It was their plan to do it this way.

Boxer and Tubbs aren't renegades, pleading for support that didn't come. This was what was expected.

I only understood this after it was over, because the "list" of those who would "stand with" them was very confusing. I didn't realize "stand with" simply meant they would show up and give a speech and then vote "no".

I don't know if any of it makes a damn bit of difference, now. I never expected them to contest at all, but this was just... weird.

How can we get reform in a one-party state?

I don't know... *sigh*

[JunkYardDogg]

7. There is no DNC Leadership

They are more concerned with becoming Neocon/Dominionists Lite
They are practicing the Politics of Capitulation and Submission

[FreepFryer]

8. That comment is more transparent, weak and useless than a glass anvil.

[cali]

9. I've been trying so hard to rein in my snarkyness

so I'll take a deep breath and simply inform you I wasn't referring to the DNC. The leadership I was talking about is the Senate leadership, as in Reid and other senior dem Senators. And your statement about neocon/dominionist is so meaninglless as not to deserve any response beyond a sigh.

[bush_is_wacko]

10. Yeah, I agree.

I think they were working on this for a while. I am energized now. I really want to work on this issue. Or am I just "ranting in the January rain eight weeks after the election."

[Seabiscuit]

11. Bullshit. I know her. You don't.

[cali]

12. Oh you know her that well do you?

Don't tell me, she's your aunt, or a close friend, and she told you herself that she stood without the support of the leadership.

[Seabiscuit]

13. Yes, I know her quite well, and she bucked the leadership. Period.

Your speculation is pure B.S.

[roenyc]

14. I think Boxer made the decision to stand and they let her

I am sure this is a group of people who work together behind the scenes, but i am also sure they needed to respond to the huge outcry of mail and calls and letters they have been receiving since last month.

the republicans have been aware of this too. so you know there had to be a late night meeting of give and take and unfortunately the Democrats gave! and gave. and we the people lost.

but i have to think boxer made this decision on her own. she was standing regardless. it was in her voice and her eyes.

at least conyers 100 page report with the fraud claims and irregularities is in the record and will be for all of history.

boxer was doing this because she believed in it. and i saw the hurt in her eyes. the hurt one feels when they know their country is practicing hate and disenfranchisement and fraud. she is a good person. maybe the only good one in that senate.

the rest just gave their canned speaches that meant nothing because while saying Ohio was not fair they still approved it. made no sense.

[Jersey Devil]

16. I think your assessment is a good one

Dem leadership went along with her objection only due to the flood of calls, emails and faxes from places like DU. They had a meeting, decided it would be counterproductive not to at least throw a bone to those demanding an objection, then lined up an impressive array of Dem Senators to speak but not vote in support of the objection.

I think Boxer was sincere but I don't know if she could have done it without leadership approval. They could have made her the minority chair of the "What's Happening in Bangladesh Committee" if she decided to buck them.

[Orsino]

15. I Keep Hearing About a Master Plan...

...but have seen no explanation of just what their abandonment of Boxer was supposed to accomplish. By refusing to stand with her, they undermined and marginalized her message, plain and simple. They made it easy for the MSM to paint her and the House rebels as fringe.

She obviously bucked the leadership.

[roenyc]

17. I agree with you - i think many of us do

i dont know if she bucked leadership or they said its cool - go ahead. but i agree that it would have been better.


look someone had to stand or there would have been a revolution. Jessie Jackson would have led his people into that senate.

As it is he said that Clinton gave him the impression she was with him.

i am so pissed at her. i am holding off on my letter, I want to wait for things to calm down. then hit her.

This was her last chance to win my support. being a new yorker i see her in action. she hasn't impressed me. and now its done.

and schummer can bite me. he is on my S list for sure. sad thing is most people just vote D or R straight down the line. we are going to have to get much more involved and moblelize for new candidates.

volunteer and stuff i guess. i am new to all of this. so i may be all wrong. but i have common sense and know when its time to get rid of someone.

[AmerDem]

19. but the leadership did not stand with Boxer!

That's the point you're missing and it's the most important point.