BREAKING: Liberals announce “support freeze”

[FourScore]

BREAKING: Liberals announce “support freeze”
by rivamer
Tue Jan 26, 2010 at 04:59:56 PM PST

This news report was just released by the AP. It sounds big.

WASHINGTON—Speaking for the millions of principled American liberals who believe in the government’s fundamental ability to best address the republic’s ills, left-wing favorite Howard Dean took the podium today in Washington to announce a "freeze" of support for the Obama Administration and its policy agenda.

Howard Dean at today's event, speaking on behalf of liberals everywhere:

"By cutting all discretionary support for the Obama Administration over the next three years, liberals in America will save up to 250 billion hours of wasted time and energy on mid-term campaigning and voting in 2010 alone. Not to mention the millions of dollars we can save withholding campaign contributions. I know this all sounds radical, even crazy, but I don’t see liberals as having much of a choice. If we continue to let the president think he has our support, there’s no telling which atrocities he may perpetrate to win over independents. It must stop here."

Dean, the former chairman of the former Democratic party, was joined on stage by illustrious liberals like Paul Krugman, Rachel Maddow, Bernie Sanders, and Markos Moulitsas, as well as many gay rights and anti-war activists, union representatives, and a smattering of nurses and teachers.

(NOTE: Jane Hamsher declined to attend, citing the "too-conservative" makeup of the gathering, while Arianna Huffington was spotted near the event jumping in place, blowing a whistle, and holding a sign with her face on it.)

As shockwaves rippled through the political establishment with news of the freeze, liberals were careful to note that this would not be an "across-the-board" cessation of support.

MSNBC's Ed Scultz on today's Ed Show:

"Let me tell you something folks: liberals in the heartland—I’m talking Minnesota and North Dakota—they’re still behind fair pay and the stimulus so this isn’t an across-the board freeze. We lefties still consider some areas of our support to be unconditional; no, I’m not talking about defense spending, folks. I’m talking about our support for green job initiatives, not torturing, and strides on gay rights. Well, you know, if the president ever chooses to make strides on gay rights."

Added Schultz:

"What’s that Mr. President? You want liberal support for Afghanistan, watered down health care, fake financial reform, and naïve post-partisanship? No sir, no how, not anymore. It bet it’s gettin’ mighty cold in that Oval Office right about now, because liberal support is frozen, partner."

Critics of the support freeze are already pegging it as a cynical act of political grandstanding, meant to garner little more than headlines. Liberals however, contend that there is a crippling deficit between what they believe and what their elected leaders do in office, a deficit that will continue to grow and threaten the long term prosperity of their ideology if it isn’t confronted now.

Much of this revolutionary sentiment within the Democratic Party seems to derive from a perceived ineffectuality on the part of the administration.

"It seems like every time Obama gets attacked by the right, he just turns the other cheek," said an anonymous Massachusetts Democrat who voted for Scott Brown last week. "He turned the other cheek on Wall Street, then he turned the other cheek on Afghanistan, giving conservatives everything they wanted. Well, he was all out of cheeks on his face when he got attacked on health care, so he turned the only ones he had left and bent over for the insurance companies. Why would I support that when Scott Brown drives a truck?"

Members of the Obama Administration have reacted quickly to today’s proposed freeze of support.

WH Press Secretary Robert Gibbs:

"The president is surprised and frustrated that liberals are so surprised and frustrated with him."

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner:

"This so-called freeze is the last thing Wall Street needs right now. Any slight indication of a change in the political climate one way or the other could be enough to send the financial system into a tailspin the likes of which we haven’t seen in weeks. Stocks could even fall below where they were when Ben Bernanke had a cold last month."

Meanwhile, White House insiders David Axelrod and Rahm Emmanuel responded to the freeze while sitting in the Oval Office with the curtains drawn. Reports indicate they looked at one another, rolled their eyes in unison, and both derisively uttered "the left" before chuckling slightly and proceeding to a strategy session on how to best win over moderate Republicans in Utah and Wyoming.

Even author and soon-to-be former RNC Chairman Michael Steele weighed in, stating: "Given liberals’ recent unprecedented Obama support binge, this is like announcing you’re going on a diet after winning a pie-eating contest," a vivid analogy that hit home with county fair goers nationwide.

Somewhat ironically, a liberal support freeze of Barack Obama was proposed in all three debates by John McCain in 2008, when he was hoping to extract disillusioned Hillary Clinton supporters from the Obama column. Obama consistently dismissed such a suggestion in the debates, claiming that it was like "using a hatchet when you need a real VP candidate."

Just following this afternoon’s support freeze announcement, a lustrous John Boehner held a press conference declaring the House GOP’s full support of the freeze, a potential indication that widespread bipartisanship may finally be upon the beleaguered Beltway.

Incredulity and frustration contributed to this report.

Update <2010-1-26 21:13:13 by rivamer>:: My sincere thanks for your munificent recommendations; it's uplifting that the satirical story a college student wrote in his freetime this afternoon could be read alongside a policy diary by a sitting Democratic senator. Honored.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/1/26/830666/-BREAKING:-Liberals-announce-support-freeze-

[TomCADem]

1. Yup, Disengaging and Sitting On The Sidelines Is The Way To Empowerment

The fact of the matter is that the Teabaggers and the corporate astroturf organizations were able to grab headlines during the first year while liberals groups were largely ignored by the media or inactive. Now, with corporate control of the media, liberals are threatening to be even more invisible. Well, then you really have not seen anything yet.

[FourScore]

2. Really?? Is it really necessary to state that it's snark?

This piece of writing mocks everyone.

[Chulanowa]

10. Actually? With the way "progressives" have been acting lately? Coulda fooled me too

Just sayin' :shrug:

[rhett o rick]

3. Ok then, what do you suggest? Rahmbo has pretty much declared war on the liberals. What options do

we have? Stop supporting DINO's.

[TomCADem]

9. Again, Over The Top Dramatization, Rahm Said Back In August 2009...

That it was (expletive) retarded to run attack ads against conservadems in a closed door meeting WITH liberal groups. He said it to their face, not behind their back. So, is this war, or a difference of opinion crudely stated?

My personal take is that liberal groups give Republicans a free pass, and devote most of their time to attacking Democrats, rather than hammering Republicans for the obstructionism. Look at this board. Most of the heat is directed at Democrats, rather than Republicans.

Now, would I state it as crudely as Rahm? No.

[Marr]

12. We have a two party system. I don't expect the Republicans to anything but obstruct.

What good would it do to bemoan the Republicans' behavior all the time?

When your own party leadership is steering in the wrong direction, what do you do? Cheer harder?

[TomCADem]

15. Because Some Republicans Are Your Elected Leaders? Why The Free Pass?

Look at the Teabaggers. They could have packed it in, but they didn't. Instead, they took the fight to individual Democrats and even some Republicans. Yet, many liberals seem to concentrate their fire only on the people on their team. With friends like that, who needs enemies? Worse, Fox News merrily exploits these divisions. Remember Paul Krugman when he was critical of the President early on? He was everywhere! But, when he supported the President HCR plan, you would rarely see him featured.

Sadly, some of my local electeds are Republicans. Does this mean I will give them a free pass? HELL NO! It is asinine to give them a free pass when they are opposing virtually all of the initiatives I believe in.

[Marr]

34. It seems to me like a lot of the Teabaggers' anger is directed at the Republican Party.

And their party is listening to them, to a degree. They don't dutifully back up every con-man the party establishment puts in front of them-- not by a longshot.

[rhett o rick]

23. I take it personally when you claim liberals spend more time attacking Democrats over republicans.

For eight years I attacked the republicans relentlessly and have continued to date. I also worked my ass off, on phone banks, door belling, writing letters, LTTE, emails, etc. to elect Obama because he promised to undo the mess bush* created. I am still waiting for him to fulfill those promises. And to have Rahmbo continually attack the liberals is disgusting.

As far as attacking Democrats, I will attack all peoples that support CorpAmerica over the working class. Even if they put a D behind their name.

I feel that Pres Obama is taking me for granted and wooing the DINO's and the republicans.

End the wars, stop the wall street speculating, or the working class will die.

[TomCADem]

30. Taking For Granted? Emanual Was Meeting Them Face to Face Privately

That does not sound like an administration either taking liberal groups for granted or ignoring them. Also, attacking liberals? Again, this is a closed door meeting with Emanuel saying the expletive to someone at that meeting. Now, look at your own post. It is filled with a lot of passion. Everything we read about Emanual is that he uses expletives.

This is why I don't read into the F-bomb that he is ignoring liberals. Quite the opposite. He is taking them seriously, because he is meeting them face to face, and getting worked up enough to drop the F-bomb. If a group meant nothing, I would expect Emanual not to attend the meeting or both saying anything.

Emanuel was crude, and there is a legitimate issue about his inter-personal skills. However, to say that Emanuel is singling out liberals because he used the F-bomb in a personal private meeting with them that he somehow does not really care about what they have to say? I think it proves the opposite.

[rhett o rick]

45. Did he meet with them to listen to them? To respect them? or tell them what he wanted from them?

He has disrespected liberals since he was appointed COS. He is selling out the liberals to win over the Conserva-Dems. And the Conserva-Dems dont want HCR, nor anything else a REAL Democrat wants. They are Democrats in Name Only.

[madville]

28. How can republicans obstruct when they are the minority

We have had a strong majority and have nothing to show for it. The republicans shouldn't even be a factor. The republican excuse is wearing out quickly.

[TomCADem]

33. The Republican Excuse? Another Pro-Free Pass Democrat?

This is amazing how much Democrats defend Republicans on this board, and refuse to hold them to the same standards we hold Democrats. Why? Why shouldn't Republicans be held accountable for simply stalling any attempt at reform? If a few Republicans were willing to negotiate, we would have had health care reform last year. But, they decided to play politics with the entire process.

The Republican excuse?

I don't know what to say. At least with most Democrats, I think that there is an honest effort to address disagreements. Some folks like single payer. Some folks want no public option. Unfortunately, due to united opposition from the Republicans, everyone on the Democratic side has to agree, and the Democrats tried. Most of them really did tried. The Republicans made no such effort.

No, I don't think they should get a free pass for turning their back on an effort address the health care crisis.

[madville]

36. But the Democrats get a free pass

They had the control, huge majorities on both sides and it has been wasted. We are going to lose seats in 9 months and the administration will move farther right to compensate. The Republicans were out of the loop but our guys dropped the ball, sad really, it will take years to get another opportunity like we had.

[TomCADem]

37. Democratics Are Getting A Free Pass, Check Out This Website...

It is called www.democraticunderground.com

It is a partisan Democratic website. Tell me if they are getting a free pass.

Then, check out the corporate media, then the conservative sites. The RNC has Fox News as a 24/7 campaign and propaganda arm while Democrats have nothing remotely similar. Due to the Supreme Court ruling, this disparity will likely grow.

[rhett o rick]

46. We do not have a strong majority. Part of our majority are Conserva-Dems that vote republican. nt

[Toots]

41. Most of the heat is directed at Democrats, rather than Republicans.

There is no chance of changing a Republican's opinions so why bother. We put heat on Democrats to get them to examine their principles and ideas and maybe just maybe occasionally throw us a bone now and then. I can tell you don't think that is such a good idea and are quite satisfied with how the very worst offender are being rewarded by the actions or inactions whatever the case might be of our Government.

[EFerrari]

6. It's too bad Rahm didn't ignore us too instead of insulting us once a week like

a man who never needs our money again . . .

[TomCADem]

11. Ignore? Exact Opposite, Rahm Was Meeting With Liberal Groups!

Ignore would suggest that Rahm is not even meeting with liberal groups. However, this is how the retarded comment went down:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703808904575025030384695158.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_5

The friction was laid bare in August when Mr. Emanuel showed up at a weekly strategy session featuring liberal groups and White House aides. Some attendees said they were planning to air ads attacking conservative Democrats who were balking at Mr. Obama's health-care overhaul.

"F—ing retarded," Mr. Emanuel scolded the group, according to several participants. He warned them not to alienate lawmakers whose votes would be needed on health care and other top legislative items.

Emanuel was meeting directly with liberal groups and said it to their face, and they promptly complained to the Wall Street Journal.

[EFerrari]

13. Yes. And as I said, it's too bad he didn't ignore us instead of insulting us AGAIN.

[TomCADem]

16. Well, Agreed, He Did Insult A Liberal Group To Their Face, That Is True...

...and perhaps it would have been better to ignore them, rather than to drop the F-bomb on them.

[JamesA1102]

22. Yes Liberals always run to the WSJ to complain.

They know that they'll get a fair hearing from any media outlet owned by Murdock.

[rhett o rick]

24. I am getting tired of you liberal haters. Arent you in the wrong group here? nt

[JamesA1102]

39. How am I a liberal hater????

I'm just pointing out that the Murdoch owned WSJ would not be a place liberals would run to to complain.

[rhett o rick]

44. Sorry I must have misunderstood. I am sick of all the post in DU attacking liberals. nt

[TomCADem]

29. Do You Think Fox News Featured Jane Hamscher Because It Agreed With Her?

Or, Geraldine Ferraro, because Fox was concerned about her being seen as racist? My point is that there is something suspect about the WSJ printing a story raising the concerns of the left.

[JamesA1102]

40. That's my point too.

It's called sarcasm.

[Foo Fighter]

32. Actually, he doesn't need our money. Never did.

All those $25 donors they liked to tout during the election? Well, once they were elected, those donors were quickly tossed aside. The big players saw them as nothing more than suckers. They made for good press and that's it. Now it's on to the REAL business of making their BIG donors happy. Which was their real intention in the first place.

[tridim]

4. The "Liberals" haven't supported him for about 12 months now.

Some even longer.

So, good luck with your threat Mr. "Liberal" college student.

[rhett o rick]

25. So do you think that spewing hate against liberal Democrats is helpful? Or do you care? nt

[flyarm]

5. as someone on DU said today and I will copy , there will be a "Voting Freeze in November"..

I can feel the chill already! And will be too busy building a fire and rolling up in my snuggy to go vote!

[Beacool]

7. Liberals shoved Obama down our throats, now they are complaining???

The party leadership pushed hard for Obama, now they have to live with their choice. Unfortunately, so do the rest of us.

:-(

[Marr]

14. The party leadership is liberal?

[Beacool]

17. I should have said the left and the party leadership.

They got what they wanted. Pity that the rest of us were also dragged into this morass.

[Political Heretic]

19. We should have had clinton instead? That would have solved everything?

Last I looked, Clinton was an obama solider.

[dysfunctional press]

27. there's no gaurantee that clinton would have won, either...

mccain wouldn't have chosen palin, and might have actually had a chance.

[Quixote1818]

21. Obama already is Clinton II. nt

[Marr]

35. I think Hillary Clinton would've governed identically to Obama.

That's why the entire media establishment was pushing the idea that our two "viable candidates" were Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, before we'd even had a single primary vote. Two corporate-friendly "New Democrats". Coke or Pepsi, take your pick.

Hillary Clinton is part of Obama's team, for crying out loud. Everyone around Obama are Clinton/DLC cronies.

[rhett o rick]

26. Since you hate liberals plez tell us what liberal issues you disagree with.

Not one of you liberal haters will answer that question. Are you trying to help the party or destroy it?

[cbayer]

8. FourScore

Please keep in mind that our posting rules require that copyrighted material be limited to four paragraphs or less with a link.

Thanks,

cbayer
DU Moderator

[Political Heretic]

18. That's funny.

[Quixote1818]

20. Time to get tough. Sometimes thats all you can do. nt

[ChicagoSuz219]

31. Did you miss the part that this was a satirical piece??

Having said that, I wish ALL the pundits would take a breath 'til they actually hear what's in the damn speech & then they can agree, or disagree with it. Right now, they just sound silly...

[Greyhound]

38. K&R.

[daa]

42. You left out the part where tonight Obama is

announcing more tax cuts for the rich so they start buying again and some trickles down to us for jobs.

[kjackson227]

43. The arrogance of Axelrod and Emmanuel...

is troubling to say the least. President Obama needs to reign them in before it's too late. The rolling of eyes and chuckling is very offensive and disrespectful.

[amborin]

47. K&R

[Rockholm]

48. Is this a joke or is this for real?

I hope it is for real. God, would I love to the the Liberal Wing of the Democratic Party sit on their collective hands during the State of the Union tonight. It irks the shit out of me when the pukes sit there and do nothing. It would really get Obama's goat to have the Dems sit there and stay silent.
Would love to see the look on that smarmy Rahm if that happened.