Skip to main content

View Diary: "They want to destroy this country" Really? (208 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Just a quick question (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laconic Lib

    When did the Clintons engage in racist dog whistle politics? I'm not defending them but just wondering. Also, I'm from New York as well and I agree with you about Gillebrand, she is pretty corporate and only recently started sounding progressive. Didn't know Cuomo got Koch money but he did start to kind of reverse himself, especially with the millionaire's tax half victory. Although, his father was pretty great for NY but the apple falls far from the tree.

    •  a few examples (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Bill's comment about SC.

      Geraldine Ferraro also made comments.

      "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," Ferraro told California's "Daily Breeze" newspaper. "And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."

      "I'll hold my nose and vote but I won't hold my nose and canvass or call or donate." Some Dkos Comment

      by onemadson on Wed Jan 11, 2012 at 07:49:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's pretty damning (0+ / 0-)

        but I think the difference is Newt is going straight for a electorate that is very much racist. Not all republicans are racist but all racist are republican. I'm not sure what the Clintons were trying to do. Democrats, for the most part I think, are not racist.

    •  and I'm sure you know (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ricklewsive, MKinTN, Laconic Lib

      how obscene the donation limits are in NY politics but this just reinforces it.

      The contributions from Mr. Koch and his wife Julia to the Cuomo campaign total $74,900, according to the campaign finance records. David Koch made three separate gifts: $25,000 on July 10, 2010; $18,000 on November 16, 2009; and $6,900 on November 30, 2009. Julia Koch made two donations: $15,000 on July 10, 2010, and $10,000 on January 4, 2010. (UPDATE: The total figure is $87K)

      I have no qualms with anyone who argues that the Koch brothers would not mind destroying the American working class.  I do have problems with "democrats" who take their money.

      "I'll hold my nose and vote but I won't hold my nose and canvass or call or donate." Some Dkos Comment

      by onemadson on Wed Jan 11, 2012 at 07:52:46 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah (0+ / 0-)

        I definitely have a problem with that as well. People are talking about him running in 2016....that's an even bigger problem.

        •  Cuomo in 2016? (0+ / 0-)

          Oh good grief, seriously? That's horrible. The disgusting thing is that he'd probably stand a good chance of it, if he played his cards right. This guy would make Al Smith cringe... even, I suspect, the old and bitter Al Smith who opposed Roosevelt and the New Deal.

      •  Part of the problem with our (6+ / 0-)

        "messaging" is part of your comment above:

        the Koch brothers would not mind destroying the American working class.  

        That doesn't make any sense when it is phrased that way and really is overly hyperbolic.  When talking to people of a different political philosophy, pointing out that the Koch brothers fund politicians to get favorable laws for their polluting industries and work to depress wages so they can pay their workers less and pocket more profit for their offshore bank accounts gets more traction than a blanket statement about people wanting to destroy other people.

        When you put it into a business context, and remind folks about the unlevel playing field, you get better response.  Even teabaggers understand this phenomenon and don't like it.  When you explain what the Kochs do for aliving, most of them are kind of surprised.  I always ask them to stop buying Brawny and Dixie products so those guys don't have as much money with which to purchase politicians ;-)

        •  I think that's the one thing that (4+ / 0-)

          we and the average Republican can agree on - we want there to be more fairness and more opportunity in the system.

          We want those that are rich to pay what's right - though we might argue about what's rich, and what's right, we agree on the basic principle.

          We want help for those that deserve it. We might disagree on who deserves it, but we agree on the premise.

          We want better access to healthcare. Not INSURANCE, care. I think we both agree on that. We disagree on what it should cost and who should pay for it.

          We want better education for our children, and college that doesn't cost the earth. How we accomplish that is where we differ.

          We want banks to be better regulated, and to not screw people over. I don't think there's any daylight between us on those points. The GOP leadership is another story.

          It's not the overarching principles we disagree on - it's the path to achieve them. And those things could be worked out if Congress wasn't so full of assholes.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site