Skip to main content

View Diary: Time for the DLC to die (281 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Carpal Tunnel Rendered You Unemployable (none)
     in Silicon Valley? Don't Blame Lil' Brad and that corporate whore Landrieu. They were merely trying to help poor old put upon Big Bidness by voting with the Rethugs to gut Liddy Doles'- Elizabeth Freaking Dole for pete's sakes- 10 year in the making, scientifically unassailable, ergononomics reform. Neither of these two have ever to had slog it out in a pink collar ghetto word processing pool or decapitatate a hundred chickens per hour, ask the Hispanic community about this one Kos, so why should they give a rat's ass? If you can't afford the $1000 per plate fundraiser, you ain't shit to them cept come election time.

     What will it take for working people to wake up again in this country. Triangle Shirtwaist Redux? We had one in North Carolina at a chicken plant four years ago. Personally, I think its gonna have to be 20% unemployment among many of the people now typing on expensive computers into this blog... Saab and condo repo'd, the whole nine yards. At that point Lil' Brad will deliver a smug ass lecture on Adam Smith and the invisible hand-Landrieu will think he's talking about one of the Kappa Sig's she used to date at LSU. Only then we will perhaps have the proper conditions for reclaiming the soul of our party.

    Put the jam on the bottom shelf, so the little man can reach it. Sen. Ralph Yarborough (D-TX)

    by yellow dog on Mon May 24, 2004 at 10:32:17 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly (none)
      I can understand Democrats from the red states compromising on partial-birth abortion, ANWR, the death penalty, even mandatory drug sentencing.  But do these states not have poor people working at minimum wage?  Is their entire state medically insured?  Are their middle-class families sending their kids to college without racking up tens of thousands of dollars of debt?  Do they have seniors that don't have to rely on Social Security?  

      Some of these issues are clear winners so why are we running candidates that would put anything less than their full support behind them, and instead advocate some really inexcusable positions like the repeal of the estate tax.

      It is my opinion that the road to change begins with the candidates we run.  We can't convince the American people that we are the party of the common man (when's the last time you heard a candidate say that) if we continue to run trial lawyers and CEOs as opposed to union leaders, teachers, firefighters and police officers.  (I'm not going to even mention the need to run more women, minorities and veterans.)  Also, how can we possibly combat this conservative myth that success and hard work can only be reflected through ascension to executive level or affluence, when we constantly run people who exude just that?  We can't credibly argue that there is an entire class of good hard-working people that shound be the centerpiece of legislation and are successful because they lead decent lives and raise great kids when we run bourgeoisie for Congress and state-houses.  And of course for the union leader to be able to compete with the corporate executive we have to radically overhaul the way elections are financed in this country...good luck with that.

      Additionally, my biggest beef with some of these candidates is that they spend dead periods like this doing very little to expand their base through voter registration.  I honestly can't remember the last time I saw a serious candidate for Senate from a red state put forth a real effort to register voters and reaching out to minorities six months before the election.  I mean would not our candidate in South Carolina benefit by adding 200-400K new voters to the rolls?

    •  Precisely (none)
      When people argue to put aside "purism" its usually a thinly veiled attempt to avoid discussing policy at all, and insist that all we can, or should, do is support the most popular guy with a "D" after his or her name.

      I'm not a purist.  I believe in compromise.  But compromise should mean just that: deciding what we're willing to trade off for what in return.  Simply supporting any Democrat, however conservative, is not compromise, or even pragmatism. It's simply putting party above anything else...including real world consequences for people who need our government to change direction.

      Mike Synar - the late and very liberal Congressman from Oklahoma - can be seen as something of a model in this regard.  He understood that on some issues in Oklahoma you need to vote in a classically conservative way (e.g. gun issues).  But he was able to get elected while maintaining 90+ ADA ratings because he was a liberal who understood that compromise is necessary. Brad Carson is a conservative.  There's no reason we should be supporting such people in the primary (as the lesser evil in November is a separate issue).  We should be supporting and encouraging pragmatic liberals in red states, not Republicans-in-Democrats-clothing.  

      •  God Bless Ya Man (none)
         I was trying to make this case 3 months ago and I'm pleasantly floored that anybody else on this blog knows Mike Synar from Adam. Okie Senators Fred Harris and Elmer Thomas, that's goin way back, are two of my all time favorite politicians. If your boy Monte is cut from that cloth, I'll pass the hat for em.

        Put the jam on the bottom shelf, so the little man can reach it. Sen. Ralph Yarborough (D-TX)

        by yellow dog on Mon May 24, 2004 at 01:30:19 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Monte Johnson isn't quite Fred Harris... (none)
          ...but we'll never get another Fred Harris (or Synar or Yarborough, for that matter) if we don't insist on such folks running. Celebrating the Brad Carsons of the world is a huge step in the wrong direction. Again, I'm not saying that us Okies shouldn't vote for Carson in November...he'll certainly be the lesser evil.  But we have to stop settling for lesser evils, let alone applauding them.

          Too many Democrats in OK are so shell-shocked from our once solidly Democratic state becoming nearly solidly Republican that they're willing to sell out on virtually every issue simply to get a Democrat elected.  The result is that the Democrats really do begin to look like GOP-lite.  

          There's a great populist tradition in this part of the country that has been almost entirely ceded to the right. It's time that Dems return to their populist roots.

          •  Damn Staight (none)
             I'm tired of eulogizing. Keep speaking your peace hoss every chance you get, and I'll do the same. We got a tough row to hoe no doubt, but then so did the original populists. I gotta believe we can get this thing turned around. Meantime thanks, its guys like you who keep me coming back to this site.

            Put the jam on the bottom shelf, so the little man can reach it. Sen. Ralph Yarborough (D-TX)

            by yellow dog on Mon May 24, 2004 at 03:35:20 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site