Dem Senate Staffer-THEY ARE ACTUALLY RELIEVED!!!! That They-NOW-Have An Excuse !!! To Do NOTHING!!!!

[kpete]

I certainly wouldn't want to indicate I have any unique insight on how everyone feels around this place but I thought you might be interested in how one Senate staffer is feeling.

............

The worst is that I can't help but feel like the main emotion people in the caucus are feeling is relief at this turn of events. Now they have a ready excuse for not getting anything done. While I always thought we had the better ideas but the weaker messaging, it feels like somewhere along the line Members internalized a belief that we actually have weaker ideas. They're afraid to actually implement them and face the judgement of the voters. That's the scariest dynamic and what makes me think this will all come crashing down around us in November.

...............

This is my life and I simply can't answer the fundamental question: "what do Democrats stand for?" Voters don't know, and we can't make the case, so they're reacting exactly as you'd expect (just as they did in 1994, 2000, and 2004). We either find the voice to answer that question and exercise the strongest majority and voter mandate we've had since Watergate, or we suffer a bloodbath in November. History shows we're likely to choose the latter.

Although I realize this is far too long to publish, if you do decide to use any of it, please keep my anonymity. Just in case I'm wrong and there is more good to do yet.

the rest:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/01/relieved.php?ref=fpblg

[highplainsdem]

1. This is very painful to read, but it should be seen by more DUers. K&R

[highplainsdem]

2. I like the changed subject line, too -- summarizes it better.

[rucky]

3. This is the first thing that makes sense to me.

yes, I've become that cynical.

[FiveGoodMen]

7. Me, too.

If the Dems had put up a real fight, they might have lost.

But what they did do was give away the store at every opportunity.

And we've started to notice.

Now they have a little more cover.

And they're still not on our side.

[BeHereNow]

9. It's made sense for a long time... and you're not cynical...

You're realistic.

They are comfortable, well off ($$$) and secure about their
familie's future.

They will continue to rule as mandated by their corporate
masters as to keep benefiting financially by doing so.

They will no longer be held accountable by the pesky fact
that they held the power to change things and didn't.

They can now simply enjoy the money and power and
claim that they don't have enough votes.

Case closed.

I believe we will soon see the final demise of the country
accompanied by final collective death rattle sigh.

BHN

[Hosnon]

30. That is a very powerful piece. And makes me sick to my stomach.

It confirms what I've always feared: Democrats are, for the most part, wimps.

[rudy23]

4. I was starting to feel like a broken record. I've been saying this all day. Just wait till the fall

If you were a Democratic Congressmcritter, would you rather fight the power and risk blackmail, intimidation, slander, media piling-on to take on the most powerful people in the world?

Or would you rather a cush job with 100% perks and zero expectations?

Well, I know which one most DU'ers would prefer, but we have rules to make sure we can't run for office in our country. So, it's mostly the latter category, unfortunately.

[backscatter712]

5. If they do nothing, I do nothing.

I fought to elect Democrats last fall under the explicit promise that the Democrats we elected would fight for us.

Now they're not going to fight, just whine about being filibustered while collecting campaign cash from the corporations.

Guess what. If they're not going to fight, I'm not gonna fight. I won't give one thin dime to their campaigns. I won't phone-bank, I won't canvass, I won't do diddly shit for them. They should consider themselves lucky that I fill the oval next to their names on Election Day, because that is the only thing they will get from me.

Nothing else.

[mn9driver]

6. Let me see if I have this straight.

The Democrats in Congress don't like having the majority. It's too hard and scary to be responsible for delivering on what their base wants, so the plan is to become the minority party again as soon as possible.

That way they can continue to make worthless promises to us about what they would do, oh, if only they had some more campaign contributions to work with, and be re-elected some more, then someday, someday all our dreams will come true.

Right.

[kenny blankenship]

8. These were not the Democrats we were looking for. Most of them just need to go away.

That's how it reads to me. I know there are some good Democrats sprinkled in the Senate, but as a group they are like a Shriner's convention of FAIL.

[BeHereNow]

12. They are not Democrats at all. They are opportunists.

They know all too well where the butter for their
bread comes from, and it is not from the people,
it is from the trans national corporations.

Our government is a complete sham.

BHN

[Raineyb]

10. I wish I could say I'm surprised.

But alas I'm not.

[Romulox]

11. The "bad cop" has to be a credible threat for the schtick to work.

A supermajority puts WAY too much pressure on Democrats to enact a liberal agenda.

Brown = the Dems got their excuse back.

[KittyWampus]

13. add a few more exclamation points in there...

[kpete]

here you go

!!!!!!!!!!!
peace, kp

[KittyWampus]

20. LOL! woohoo!!!!!

:bounce: :silly:

[Robb]

14. That's the longest "on background" email I've ever seen. nt

[Skidmore]

15. He should return to his "far superior climate and quality of life."

[alsame]

16. This makes sense. I think we're at a real tipping point, where the

Congresscritters are caught between the people and corporate America.

What is good for the people is not good for corporatism and vice versa.

Now Congress is in a position of trying to keep their corporate owners happy while not screwing over the people so much that they get angry, just keep throwing us some bones now and then. The problem is, people ARE angry, very angry.

Hence the deer in the headlights look on them. I'm sure they welcome the chance to do absolutely nothing.

[reggie the dog]

17. The Democrat politicians know we have better ideas for the people

so they are relieved that they have an excuse to do nothing for us and to preserve the status quo which is to the benefit of the wealthy elite who bribe them through campaign contributions.

[KittyWampus]

18. It'd be nice if DU'ers AND Senators acknowledged the extent that Media has beaten

Democrats into submission.

And this also speaks to the inability of Democrats to generate effective talking points and then disseminating them.

[rudy23]

23. It's tough when all the talking points the Democrats generate are against Liberals

If only they could attack the right with the same veracity as their attacks on Dean, Kucinich, Jane Hamsher, and all the rest of the "left of the left" who wants their pony!


Where was the equivalent of the "pony" talking point that was aimed at the right?

[Hannah Bell]

31. +1

[Jamastiene]

40. Amen

I could not have said it better myself. :thumbsup:

[Uncle Joe]

27. I agree, Kitty and that's precisely why they need to take the corporate media head on.

It isn't as if the Democratic Party doesn't have enough ammunition, the corporate media have obvious *conflicts of interest, have done a dismal job of informing the American People as to the critical issues of the day, they've ruined their news divisions with commercial or propaganda thought as their prime directives.

The Democrats should be united in this message, if the corporate media trash one Democrat because he/she was too diligent in representing the best interests of the American People then every Democrat should call that segment of the corporate media to task, the First Amendment goes both ways.

*Those conflicts of interest are automatically at odds with the Democratic Party's ethos of being the Party of the People, De Facto, the corporate media's primary allegiance are to their commercial buying corporate clients.

The people would know this if the message was continually explained to them, but if the Democratic Party let the corporate owned Republican Party; have the field and allowing them to unilaterally promote the B.S. of a "liberal media," the Democrats will automatically have two mythic strikes against them in regards to being true to their ethos.

1st strike; The corporate media is held in low esteem by the people, The corporate media is "liberal" ergo; liberal is bad.

2nd strike; The Democratic Party can't be liberal because liberal is bad.

[joeunderdog]

33. In Mass, the media barrage for Scott Brown was worth millions in paid advertising.

Every news story had a slant disguised as fact. "Oh--everyone is mad about Coakley's negative ads. Voters want someone who won't spend all their money...blah, blah, blah..." It was like Brown was the boy wonder.

What difference did track records make at that point?

[Uncle Joe]

36. Track records make reduced or no difference if the corporate media isn't continually taken head on,

such is the power or propaganda.

But if the people believe the propaganda B.S. of the corporate media as being a "liberal" institution and as you say, said institution slants toward the Republican Candidate, the obvious inference being the Democrat must be off the charts.

[ieoeja]

19. Funny thing is, Republicans even use the line, "Democrats don't stand for anything."

While simultaneously painting Democrats as being partisan by voting 100% against a Democratic bill. The averge voter sees this and reasons the bill must have been too extremist if even moderate Republicans voted against it.

So we are too partisan while lacking the good character to stand for anything. Ironic.

[freddie mertz]

21. Well, this pretty much confirms our worst fears about the Senate leadership...

Not to mention the general weakness and lack of spirit among virtually ALL of the WDC Dems.

SAD!

[Uncle Joe]

22. I believe the author nailed the fundamental dynamic.

I also believe it's critical for the Democratic Party to remember they're the Party of the People; forgetting that ethos kills their moral strength.

Losing your moral strength kills your message, killing your message inevitably kills the messenger.

Let the Republicans represent the monopolies, trusts, oligarchs and mega-corporations and they will die on the vine, but when the Democrats try replacing the Republicans in that endeavor, the result will always be a weakening of the People's Party and resuscitation of the corrupted one.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.

[Tesha]

24. Since at least 1992, the Democrats haven't actually stood for anything.

Even though the Party Platform is still reasonable, the DLC goes
completely off the reservation every time they speak in public and
every time they vote. A DLC vote is *VIRTUALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE*
from a Republican vote, and that's why nobody can tell the difference
between the Democrats and the Republicans any more.

And nowadays, they've gotten so egregious about it that they
seem to spend more time trash-talking liberals, lefties, and
progressives than they do Republicans.

Cut the DLC loose; in November, many of them are sure losers
anyway!

Tesha

[bemildred]

25. Exactly. nt

[TheWebHead]

26. I think that was pretty obvious

even though it was disparaged here before Brown's victory. That 60 vote majority, which really wasn't 60 votes because it's 60 senators from dozens of states with different constituents and different personal ideologies, was an albatross that allowed the "base" to use as a battering ram to erode support whenever anything they proposed wasn't far enough to the left to suit their purified ideology.

[OHdem10]

28. It appears since the mid 80s Democrats seem to run as individual

candidates disregarding any platform. BTW do we have one??

Each year it appears leadership relinquishes more and more
control of party. Just sitting here in Ohio, one does not
see a cohesive party looking toward DC. Imo, this automatically
makes the party look weak.

[Hosnon]

29. "People would rather be with someone who is strong and wrong than weak and right."

That, in a nutshell, seems to be the difference between Bush and Obama.

[BurtWorm]

32. Here's the key. (It's amazing--and depressing--to have suspicions validated):

The stimulus bill in the spring showed us what was coming. In the face of a historic economic crisis, Democrats negotiated against themselves at the outset and subsequently yielded to absurd demands from self-described "moderates" to trim the package to a clearly inadequate level. No one made any rational argument about why a lower level was better. It would have been trivial to write "claw-back" provisions if the stimulus turned out to be too much or we could have done a rescission this year to give these moderates their victory, but none of this was on the table. We essentially looked like we didn't know what the right answer was so we just kinda went for what we could get. This formula was repeated in spades in both the Climate and Health Care debacles.


They're doing this with health care. The fuckers will do this with every bill that comes through.

[Dr.Phool]

34. Kick and rec!

Fucking cowards. They won't stand for anything, and we'll pay for it in November.

People wanted change. They want results.

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. I have cocluded the political elites do not want to do a thing

sorry... but they simply don't

They have the fucking majority... so at this point I have to think they don't want to.

[tblue37]

37. Here are the parts that jump out at me:

The Republican Majority in the House had steadily eroded so that by the end of the Clinton years they had only a 5 seat cushion (223) in the House, but their strong majority in the Senate (55) kept them firmly in control.

<snip>

Despite Jeffords' flip, and the razor-thin majority in the House, the Democrats dealt no significant losses to President Bush and his agenda went essentially unchecked, and nominations were processed efficiently and quickly (after all, the people had spoken!).

<snip>

Republicans now had a 51-seat Majority in the Senate and had strengthened in the House to a mighty 229 seats. . . . I dreamed of having big majorities like 55 Senators so that we could really do the stuff we've all been waiting for.

<snip>

It was disheartening when it seemed that Reid was allowing McConnell's disingenuous narrative of "it's always taken 60 votes to get anything done" to take hold, but we were later even saved from that when Specter switched. But it seems we've spent the entire year moving our own goalposts farther away. Things have gotten so bad that in roaming the halls today it feels exactly as if we lost the Majority last night.

<snip>

As others have done, he points out forcefully that with a slim majority, the Republcians are able to push through anything they want, even when they have won by the slimmest of margins. But with a huge Democratic majority and a clear mandate, the Democrats still act as though the Republicans have won.

[laughingliberal]

38. The crux of the problem with the current crop of Dems and the administration:

From the article:

"I believe President Clinton provided some crucial insight when he said, "people would rather be with someone who is strong and wrong than weak and right." It's not that people are uninterested in who's right or wrong, it's that people will only follow leaders who seem to actually believe in what they are doing. Democrats have missed this essential fact."

I have always believed if the President stood up and fought for the correct measures and lost we would be better off. People would respect him for standing up. And if he was standing up for things that helped people and the Republicans obstructed it would reflect badly on them.

[pleah]

39. This is what I thought when they pissed the race away in Mass.. n/t

[rudy23]

41. If I wanted to throw an election in Mass, I'd say Curt Schilling was a Yankee fan

That's just the most obvious way.

[cascadiance]

42. Republicans didn't excuse themselves to do NOTHING with LESS votes! They FOUGHT!

We aren't electing these bums to occupy an office and do nothing.

They have other options like reconciliation and nuking or altering the filibuster rules. If the Republicans had these options to get through important legislation, you KNOW they'd do it!

And if they think the media will hide these from voters, they won't if they can flip it to make it sound like a weakness to get MORE Republicans like Brown elected.

It's time for Senate Dems to work for the PEOPLE and throw off the shackles of their corporatist slave masters!

[ChrisMCV]

43. Realization is a bitch

My sympathies to those who are just now realizing that the ones they elected are corporate sellouts.
Republicans have been as well and probably sold out faster (friends to business after all) but the democrats sold out just the same.

Let me amend that a bit, I am talking about the politicians, not the regular working American on either side of the fence. The corporations don't give a shit enough about any of us to bother buying us off, they just offer the bread and circus of American Idol and the NFL.