Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Tommorrow's Headline? "Rahm Emanuel Blames Ted Kennedy "

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-19-10 09:25 PM
Original message
Tommorrow's Headline? "Rahm Emanuel Blames Ted Kennedy "



“Rahm never stabs you in the back. He stabs you in front.”


http://gawker.com/5127128/rahm-emanuel-already-knifing-enemies

You know it is coming, right? The last administration this ready to throw fellow Democrats under the bus was that of Georgia peanut farmer and nuclear engineer turned president Jimmy Carter--who felt that he owed no one in his own party anything. Carter paid for his indifference to his party by almost losing his own Party nomination (to Ted Kennedy) and then going on to lose his re-election.

Politico reports that "Rahm Emanuel has blamed Coakley, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Democratic pollster Celinda Lake for failing to see Brown's surge in time to stop it."


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/01/rundown---011910.html

Now, officially speaking, Rahm is 100% against Democrats criticizing other Democrats. When the Democrats being criticized are Obama and his corporate Dem buddies.

The Politico’s Jonathan Martin reported this morning that Rahm Emanuel warned leaders of liberal groups in a private meeting this week that it was time to stop running ads attacking Blue Dog and “centrist” Dems on health care.

I’m told, however, that Emanuel went quite a bit further than this.

Sources at the meeting tell me that Emanuel really teed off on the Dem-versus-Dem attacks, calling them “f–king stupid.” This was a direct attack on some of the attendees in the room, who are running ads against Dems right now.


http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/rahm-slammed-dems-attacking-other-dems-as-f-king-stupid-sources-say/

On the other hand, if Democrats dare to thwart any of Obama/Emanuel's ambitions--like a sharp move to the political right aka escalating the war in Afghanistan to appease the Military Industrial Complex---they are immediately tossed under the bus. Here is what happened to liberal Congressional Dems who did not want to fund Obama's War.

The White House is playing hardball with Democrats who intend to vote against the supplemental war spending bill, threatening freshmen who oppose it that they won't get help with reelection and will be cut off from the White House, Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) said Friday. "We're not going to help you. You'll never hear from us again," Woolsey said the White House is telling freshmen.


http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2009/12/16/white_house/index.html

What's that sound? Screech! "Gah!" Squish! Why, that is the sound of another Democrat being thrown under the bus by Rahm Emanuel.

He has done it to Howard Dean, the true heart and soul of the Democratic left (Obama only played at being a leftist in order to win the nomination from Hillary in a campaign remarkably similar to that of Carter in 1976).

Turn off MSNBC. Tune out Howard Dean and Keith Olbermann. The White House has its liberal wing in hand on health care, says White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

“There are no liberals left to get” in the Senate, Emanuel said in an interview, shrugging off some noise from the likes of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) that a few liberals might bolt over the compromises made with conservative Democrats.


http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/12/18/rahm-emanuel-dont-worry-about-the-left/tab/article/

OMG! Did the White House just throw KO under the bus, too? The man who sold his soul ( or at least compromised his integrity) by declaring the Hillary was bad for not denouncing Geraldine Ferraro (even though she did denounce Ferraro) but who praised Obama for first refusing to denounce his pastor and then later praised him again for changing his mind? The man who aired Obama campaign talking points as if they were real news and not political pr? They are throwing their own media shill under the bus? Pretty short sighted, if you ask me.

And that is my real concern. I don't care if Democrats love each other or not. But they have to work together. Jimmy Carter learned the hard way that if you screw your fellow Democrats, they will screw you in return, where it hurts the most--at re-election, time.

Here are the facts. Massachusetts has the same sorry excuse for universal health care that Obama and the corporate Democrats are trying to shove down our throats. Democrats in that state are not amused by talk of how they must preserve the Dem's 60 vote majority in the Senate so that health insurers nationwide can do to folks in Minnesota and Alabama what they are doing right now in Boston. They were probably hoping that the new Democratic controlled Washington would fix their healthcare mess, not export it to the other 49 states. We all know misery loves company, but misery would rather have affordable health care.

The problem with Coakley is not that she did not try hard enough. Her troubles began when business as usual Democrats in Washington decided to toss the American people under the bus (it is getting pretty crowded under there) by whipping up a nasty concoction that will require us to purchase insurance at rates that health insurers will be allowed to set (and fix among themselves) with no regulation at any level, state or federal. These crafty politicians stuck a cherry on this mess and labeled it "Health Care Reform"--fooling no one.

Massachusetts should be a warning to the White House. In the midterms, Democrats everywhere are going to do what they appear to be doing in that state---staying home. Of course, that might not bother the Democrats that we have in executive branch right now. They seem to care more for the regard of Republicans than members of their own party...like President Jimmy Carter.

Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., once court historian to the Kennedy's, went so far as to read Carter out of the Democratic Party. "He's a Republican," gruffed Schlesinger. "He has the temperament of a small-business man who happened to become President."


http://www.newsweek.com/id/211854

And we all know where throwing fellow Democrats under the bus got Jimmy Carter.

So, do not be surprised if, sometime tomorrow, Emanuel or some other corporate Democratic clone does not blame the dead Senator Ted Kennedy for this election loss---and for the health care reform fuck up in general.

Why did he let himself get brain cancer and die right when we needed him? What a sorry excuse for a Democratic leader!

Oh, by the way, ever wonder what happened to Don Siegelman?

Word in Alabama political circles is that a fix might be in--again--on the case of former Governor Don Siegelman.

What kind of fix is it this time? Word is that Jeff Sessions and Richard Shelby, Alabama's two Republican U.S. senators, have struck a deal with the Obama administration that would allow Bush-appointed prosecutor Leura Canary to remain in control of the Siegelman case.

Is this for real? Alabama Rep. John Rogers (D-Birmingham) reportedly spoke openly about the deal at a civil-rights breakfast on Sunday and asked those present to contact Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. Siegelman is taking it seriously; he sent an e-mail to supporters, urging them to contact Emanuel and demand that Canary be removed from office.


http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-Another-Fix-In-Place-On-by-Roger-Shuler-090714-280.html

He is under the bus, too. Pretty soon, it will be a fashionable place to be, like Nixon's enemies list.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SemiCharmedQuark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-19-10 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Geraldine Ferraro and Rev. Wright are your "victims"?
Really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. not to be rude, but...
do you have a reading comprehension problem?

:crazy:

really.



As for the OP - Excellent post, McCamy, K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
branders seine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-19-10 09:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. Well, Teddy was one of those damned liberal leftists
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emsimon33 Donating Member (904 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-19-10 09:47 PM
Response to Original message
3. It's Obama's hubris!
When he threw Dean under the bus, it was all over but the roll of the credits!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clear eye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-19-10 10:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. That Siegelman thing. All I can say is OMG, like a teenager.
The info in the rest of your post I've heard before, but that Siegelman thing--keeping someone who's been shown to be compromised in charge of prosecuting (actually persecuting) a formerly important Dem. He's thrown the whole Alabama Dem party under the bus w/ this. You know what they say about stepping on people when you're on your way up. And what could he have possibly gotten from two of the worst obstructionist Republicans that could possibly justify this? I feel this viscerally, like a stomach punch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-19-10 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. What would they possibly think they have to gain by abandoning Siegelman?
Neither Alabama 'Pug senator will EVER work with the admin on anything.

Does Obama WANT the Alabama Democrats to remain extinct for some reason?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #6
15. Abramoff Link
Edited on Wed Jan-20-10 01:41 AM by Selena Harris
From my recollection, John McCain witheld some Abramoff emails when McCain was investigating the BIA -Abramoff tribal scandal.

Abramoff was trying to keep Siegalman out of office so Bob Riley-who was anti gambling- could be elected Governor of Alabama.Abramoff wanted gambling to stay out of Alabama,and stay in Mississippi-where he had tribal casino clients.

Will post link if I can find it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Abramoff E-Mail
McCain Withheld Controversial Abramoff EmailFeb 25, 2008 ... On the stump, Sen. John McCain often cites his work tackling the excesses of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff as evidence of his sturdy ...
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../mccain-withheld-controver_n_88304.html - Cached - Similar

The actual email is shown in the Huff Po article.

The Abramoff investigation is STILL ongoing,and there are STILL indictments being handed down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Selena Harris Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #16
19. Scratch my back,I'll scratch yours......
Could New Revelations Blow the Roof Off GOP Corruption ...Nov 6, 2009 ... This all is tied to Jack Abramoff and probably Karl Rove, so this could ... Another ugly GOP prosecution, similar to hit job on Siegelman. ...
open.salon.com/.../could_new_revelations_blow_the_roof_off_gop_corruption - Cached

Legal Schnauzer: The Abramoff Trail: Is Siegelman Prosecutor ...Jan 12, 2009 ... The Abramoff Trail: Is Siegelman Prosecutor Trying to Cover the Tracks? ... an apparent reference to Bush advisor Karl Rove. ...
legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/.../abramoff-trail-is-siegelman-prosecutor.html - Cached
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
clear eye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #19
27. Very interesting but that still doesn't explain why the WH wants to protect Bush/Rove. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #6
26. They prefer the political myth that the sheer force of Obama WON 2008 when the truth is that ANY Dem
would have won 2008, as the backlash against Bush was so great at that time.

Siegelman's implausible 2002 defeat was crucial to Rove's national election stealing roadmap for 2002 and 2004.

No Dem powerbroker wanted it known that 2004 was stolen. Too many Dems were vested in keeping Bush IN office. Obama should NEVER have allowed the Clinton wing of the party so much sway over his administration - they only circle wagons for their own, and never for OTHER Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snagglepuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:34 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. I agree that shocker in the story is Siegelman. I hadn't heard about this
development either. It is absolutely jaw dropping.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Krashkopf Donating Member (965 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-19-10 11:21 PM
Response to Original message
5. The Corporate-Controlled Media will ignore the REAL MESSAGE from Massachuesetts . . .
it was a clear REJECTION of the "third way," DLC wing of the Democratic Party.

Americans were energized by Barack Obama, and came out for him in droves during the elections, because Democrats, Independents, and even some Republicans, were HUNGRY for REAL CHANGE.

Unfortunately, whether he is under the spell of a Rasputin - Rahm Emanuel; or, because it is his true nature, President Obama has governed like a timid DLC Corporatist. "That's not change, that's more of the same!"

Emanuel and Obama alientated the Democratic base, and that base stayed home tonight.

The President, and his team, have no one to blame but themselves.

Hopefully, they will learn from it, and work to re-build some bridges with the base, before the mid-terms. Otherwise, 2010 is going to be UGLY!





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
7. "Tomorrow's Headline? "Rahm Emanuel Blames Ted Kennedy " I almost busted a gut on that one!
Excellent post, McCamy, but the bottom cartoon IS a bit weird for me.

Rec.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 12:52 AM
Response to Original message
9. Even before I see tomorrow's headline, I'm checking Bradblog
Edited on Wed Jan-20-10 12:53 AM by mojowork_n
and DKos and some other sites to see what the discrepancies were between the final polls and exit polls, and the final tallies. Election machinery in MA is of the hackable, not-guaranteed or tamper-proof variety.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. let us know if you find out anything interesting, ok?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mojowork_n Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #11
30. The one site that had something interesting...
...kept flipping back to an old web page from 2008, I think. A google search turned up an interesting comparison of those voting districts where 1.) ballots were hand-counted (Coakley won that grouping), and where there were 2.) ES&S and 3.) DIEBOLD machine-counted ballots, where Coakley didn't do nearly as well.

You might find it here, by now:

http://electionfraudblog.com/

I have to admit I hadn't really been following the campaign all that closely, so I'm still doing catch-up, information-wise. I had heard Zogby had Coakley UP by 5 percentage points, the morning of the election. I have been looking for OTHER poll results -- any kind of poll results (other day-of-the-election predictions, from other pollsters, as well as exit polls) but....

There aren't any exit poll results:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/19/massachusetts-exit-polls_n_428655.html

Those seeking exit polls for the 2010 Massachusetts Senate Race will be disappointed to know there aren't any.... just days ago the Boston Sunday Globe carried the headline, "Senate poll: Coakley up 15 points." Since the election wasn't expected to be close not long ago, some apparently thought the exit poll process wouldn't be needed.

Curious Americans aren't the only losers. John Fund of the Wall Street Journal writes in his blog that the missing exit polls are "disappointing journalists and political scientists alike."

Also on the matter, MSNBC anchor David Shuster tweeted: "No news organization is doing exit polls in Mass senate race today. Only numbers will be the election results themselves. Voting ends 8pm."


Pair that with the pre-election "orange alerts" about Massachusetts (most voting districuts use ES&S, or DIEBOLD -- they've changed their name -- voting machines) -- and there is some cause for concern.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/election-experts-issue-orange-alert-for-massachusetts-special-election-81957967.html



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democracy1st Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. no cheating whatsoever in Mass dems run that state
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JVS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 12:52 AM
Response to Original message
10. If he hadn't picked such an inconsiderate time to die!!!!
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ardent15 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
13. Rahm strikes again
With his corporate DLC bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lord Helmet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:46 AM
Response to Original message
17. When ax-grinding like this, have a care when speaking about the dead.
Edited on Wed Jan-20-10 02:04 AM by Lord Helmet
k 'n u
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:58 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. Comical
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 02:15 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. The OP was actually speaking about The Rahm
It was a joke about how The Rahmster will assign blame, not an argument that Teddy really IS to blame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lord Helmet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 02:22 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. duh
it was a gratuitous use of Teddy to make a point
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #22
29. It was a fully justifiable invocation of the memory of a man of principle
To comment on a man of no principle.

This did no harm to Teddy's memory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Feron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 01:47 AM
Response to Original message
18. Excellent post!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Puglover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
23. Excellent OP!
KnR!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
24. Recommended and bookmarked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
25. And now that Obama has not helped two elections
His white house has nothing to offer the dems in congress. They will want him to stay away from their campaigns.

That's a good thing as long as he has Emmanuel doing Emmanuale's bidding in Obama's name.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SanchoPanza Donating Member (410 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
28. Show me on the doll where Rahm touched you.
The Emanuel bashing, while I'm sure has been fun, is getting rather boring.

He's right. The Coakley campaign should share the bulk of the blame. Coakley had plenty of money following the primary to do her own internal tracking polls but decided not to, and is now blaming the DNC for everything. And the DSCC should have known better than to ignore a special election that would fill a necessary Senate seat DAYS BEFORE a major Democratic initiative was to come up for the final vote.

If Brown's rise was caught earlier, and the DSCC was able to dump some money into the Boston GOTV effort (and people had the time to light a fire under the ass of the Boston establishment that never turned out for Coakley), she could certainly have pulled off a squeaker at worst. Coakley's highest polling was at 58%, and she lost by just under five points. That swing did not happen over the course of last week.

Everyone who needed to have their eyes on the road were looking off into the wilderness, believing that if you run as a Democrat in MA, you're guaranteed a victory. Unless you're name is John Silbur, Shannon O'Brien, and (now) Martha Coakley.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nexus7 Donating Member (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-20-10 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
31. Mass. didn't vote for the reason cited
You said:
"Democrats in that state are not amused by talk of how they must preserve the Dem's 60 vote majority in the Senate so that health insurers nationwide can do to folks in Minnesota and Alabama what they are doing right now in Boston."

I don't think it's that complex. Under the proposed HC bill (House & Senate), the states most-opposed to HCR - southern and western states - would get the most benefit, since the fed gov would pick up most of the tab (in the 70%) range for new Medicaid recipients under the bills. On the other hand, more progressive states such as Mass. would get in the 50% range, thereby ending up subsidizing the former states. Brown's message was that they didn't want to do this (see WaHoPo). Apparently, a lot of voters agreed with that message. Your interpretation is far more complex, that Mass. voters didn't want to throw other states under the bus because they know how it is there - altruistic - but not as simple as them not wanting to pay for other states HC, considering they already have the benefits proposed for the national level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC