Skip to main content

View Diary: A Reply to "Pragmatists" (583 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Vote for Betrayers, Get Betrayed. (13+ / 0-)

    And finish destroying America as we know it.

    That's all you're doing when you vote for known corrupt Democrats, just to beat the nutjob Republican.

    The Corporatist Democrats are the real danger, not the wacko Republican, because the wacko Republicans engender a huge public backlash once they get in office and expose how insane they are.

    Look at Walker, look at the complete collapse of the R's after Katrina, and once the implications of Iraq became clear to the public.

    The only reason the Republicans are still a viable party right now, is because they were pulled back from the brink of self-destruction by the corruption of the Corporate Democrats, who took over in '06 and '08 and then delivered for Wall Street and health insures while continuing to screw the middle class.

    If Obama and the Democrats had done what they were elected to do, Reform the government and end the Iraq war, the Republican party would be dead right now, fragmented, with an evangelical party and a Corporatist "conservative" party scrambling to form from the ashes.

    Look at how horrid the Republican presidential candidates are. The Republicans know that their own candidates suck, that's why they can't pick one, they're all bad options, and that's the best the Republican party can offer against a President they all despise!

    And the Democrats suck worse.

    Corporatist Democrats, like Barack Obama, say the right things, then work for the .1%.

    It's that simple. Vote for them again, destroy your country.

    •  Amen! (7+ / 0-)

      On every single point: amen!  What's been labelled as "pragmatism" is nothing more than the inability to see beyond localized elections to see the macro-level electoral effects that happen to a paralyzed party and the policy effects.

      •  Exactly (4+ / 0-)

        I almost dedicated a diary to this very observation.

        I would have used the chess analogy. What people are calling pragmatic is merely seeing only one move ahead. When you step back and look many moves ahead, the play changes completely.

        The "pragmatist" would lose at chess the same way they are making the Democrats lose at politics.

        Someone should start a chess club at Daily Kos.

        •  This is an interesting idea (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          because people can be caught up in the notion that taking the next "baby" step will lead to yet another "baby" step in the same direction they wish to go. There is no reason to believe that is true but rather what we are seeing is a sell job not a policy job.

          The kernels of rightward drift in a compromised decision such as the final formulation of the health care act may have more traction (by solidifying and strengthening the profits of the very industry that needs to be altogether out of the equation) than the leftward direction of the health care bill itself but the bill gets sold as progress. The power of the ability to choose a public option even within a basically private insurance system was too great to allow it to happen. It had too much leftward traction. The kinds of compromises Obama has made are of this nature. The extension of tax breaks to the rich including the breaks for hedge fund managers, the non-dissolution of the banks and ratings agencies who defrauded the country (the world really), the non-prosecution of the war criminals who allowed torture, the non-prosecution of the telecoms are all caves that entrench the powerful more than any leftward policies have strengthened progressive ideals. And so has gone every single major decision in this administration. Hey I am glad for the repeal of DADT but how does that threaten the oligarchy? It doesn't and that is the major progressive achievement of Obama--IMHO.

          I mean who owes this bad debt about which all conversation seems to revolve now--the banks and investment houses do but they sold it all to the public and now the world economic community wants the public to pay it off. Why is there not a hue and cry coming from this supposedly liberal administration? Why--because they are in collusion and they have given away the farm. Even Obama's rhetoric supports this. The talons are deep.

          Force is the midwife of every old society pregnant with a new one. Marx

          by Marihilda on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 07:01:15 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  When it comes to Obama - I just couldn't do it. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      where4art, J M F

      Despite his (what looked like) intentional failures - he has achieved great things.  There is more than one Diary that lists these accomplishments.  
      On the other hand, he has caved on a lot of really important stuff - even when we demanded that he draw a line in the sand and not move.  Things like extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy.  He had the perfect argument to use - the deficit would increase uncontrollably.  I know there was quite a bit of wheeling and dealing, hostage taking, and people that might have been hurt even further - but he could have held his ground, vetoed it, and made them go back to work.  He wouldn't look any worse than he does now.

      I could go on other-handing all night too.

      He'll still get my vote, although he has not earned it - because I don't think I would (literally) survive another Republican (or god forbid Teapublican) administration.  That's asking for some serious pain.  Maybe OWS would be behind a new Party, and maybe not.  Maybe the public would flock to them, but they wouldn't right this second.  This movement is growing constantly, because - it feels different, it feels like what I've been waiting for all this time.

      #OccupyOMC - "We have a permit, its called The Constitution".

      by Evolutionary on Wed Nov 30, 2011 at 08:42:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Boy, I hear ya on that (5+ / 0-)

        Those 8 years when the little sniveling sociopath Bush was in the White House were like living with the sound of fingernails on chalkboard.

        But at least we knew what we were up against with Dubya. With Obama, you have people drinking sand, thinking it's water.

        For that, he is much more dangerous than any Republican.

        •  Obama *is* more dangerous than any R. (8+ / 0-)
          With Obama, you have people drinking sand, thinking it's water.

          For that, he is much more dangerous than any Republican.

          For one reason, because the Rs are so loony and/or stupid that the general public cannot take them seriously for more than one election cycle at a time.

          But Obama looks, and sounds, credible. We can be proud to have him go overseas, instead of cringing like we did every time W stepped in front of mic or massaged some unwilling foreign leader's shoulders.

          Can you imagine Rick Perry, Bachman, or Herman the Godfather of Grope blundering around Europe, creating idiocy and mayhem?

          Neither will the American voting public.

          That's what makes Obama (and Bill Clinton before him) so dangerous as a .1% sellout.

          We like him.

          He'll give us a big hug, and Bill Cinton will toss us a smooch (and maybe a reach-around), while our house is being looted behind our back, and thugs are being armed to control our outrage when we finally figure it out...

          •  Congress is more dangerous than any Obama. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            It's easy to fixate on the Jesus figure, but we really need to maintain a viable strategy for taking the political high points. Obama's and Romney would be utterly stymied by a semi-honest Congress.

            •  You can't parse out the corruption. (0+ / 0-)

              All the candidates are taking money from the same .1%, so you can't differentiate between Oval Office Corporatism vs Congressional Corporatism.

              I think it's actually easier to put a non-Corporatist in the White House, because of the Jesus factor, BUT...he or she

              would be utterly stymied by a [fully Corporatist] Congress.

              The Presidency is a huge bully pulpit, however. An honest Reformer in the White House could shred the corrupt legislators, especially in the environment seeded by OWS.

              Perot did not have OWS, and neither did Nader. OWS is a game changer (finally!).

              This is all hypothetical though, a lot of dominoes have to fall before these issues even become a consideration.

              •  No, but we can distinguish between (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                3rdOption, FishOutofWater

                effective targets. The White House is a political white elephant, as it is far too expensive for any political insurgency to overwhelm the phalanx of corporate media stooges and power brokers vetting and protecting the preferred candidates. All that money, labor and time is better spent downstream, federating political strength moving from victory to victory. Tactics, people. Tactics.

                •  We'll see... (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  flowerfarmer, James Kresnik

                  The dkos strategy of "more and better" has not moved the rudder of the big ship D one degree to the left. Rather, Progressives have lost ground and are openly mocked by Obama and his people.

                  Democratic mayors are deploying militarized police to attack and arrest PEACEFUL Reform-oriented occupiers. DEMOCRATIC mayors.

                  They are not on your side, and they're not going to be on your side.

                  OWS has done more in two months to move the national dialog and begin to create momentum for Reform than the dkos community has done in its years of existence.

                  This is a period of chaos and disruption. The normal rules do not apply, and the bad people intend to use that to their advantage. We simply cannot predict what's going to happen, or what's going to work, in this dynamic and volatile environment.

                  Things are going to change, one way or the other.

                •  Yes. You get my final point. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  James Kresnik

                  This isn't about the White House. This is about restoring progressive values, one district at a time, to the Democratic Party. It's about effective communication that moves public opinion towards supporting progressive policies.

                  look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

                  by FishOutofWater on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 08:59:28 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Baby steps don't work in a crisis. n/t (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    James Kresnik
                  •  Sorry, but I agree with 3rd Option. (0+ / 0-)

                    There is no time left for a long game. To continue dragging this out courts disaster as it gives the corporatist more time to implement the countermeasures necessary to stymie a populist revolt, i.e. out-and-out fascism.

                    The Democratic Party, as an institution, is so corrupt and disreputable that, in most cases, it would cheaper and more effective to run an outside insurgency. On the other hand, 3rdOption, we must choose targets carefully and rapidly develop a set of workable tactics. Leave the POTUS out of this. That problem can be dealt with later.

          •  Are you advocating voting for an R for Prez, then? (0+ / 0-)
        •  Or... I can't say it, yes can, no I can't, yes I (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          James Hepburn

          can, shudder - chewing on oh god, ice down my spine..... aluminum foil.  AAAGGH!

          #OccupyOMC - "We have a permit, its called The Constitution".

          by Evolutionary on Wed Nov 30, 2011 at 09:24:11 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Then you fail, and so does America. (4+ / 0-)
        He'll still get my vote, although he has not earned it

        [champagne glasses clinking]

        The .1% wins.

        They own you.

        There will NEVER be a non-crazy, non-socially destructive Republican presidential candidate.

        The Republicans are Bad Cop. And you fall for Good Cop.

        Your repeated failure is a life sentence for us all.

    •  the dynamic here is (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Kresnik, 3rdOption, J M F

      "good cop, bad cop" with corrupt GOP politicians in the "bad cop" role, corrupt corporatist Democrats as "good cops" . . . and to complete the analogy, imagine the "good cops" and "gad cops" going out for donuts afterwards and laughing at the yokels their act took in.

      Peak Oil is NOW! Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Thu Dec 01, 2011 at 12:56:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site