Skip to main content

View Diary: Markos's Barbaric "Yup" (132 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I was right there with you buddy on that thread. (0+ / 0-)

    On that note, we also got it wrong on this one:

    •  I don't think that opinion here (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Yoshimi, petral

      gelled for Tom G. in that race, so I wouldn't say that the site got it wrong overall; there was lots of support for various people, including Quigley.  I liked Tom, but basically, there were so many good choices that I didn't know where to go.  I was just pissed off at Tom's grandstanding re Burris towards the end.

      So, Markos: we're supposed to hope Murphy wins in NY-20, but not donate to or work for him? Yup?

      by Seneca Doane on Thu Apr 02, 2009 at 12:32:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I guess where we get it wrong is not knowing what (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Seneca Doane, pelagicray

        is going on with the voters in a particular district.  We make proclamations here whether a candidate gets a thumbs-up or thumbs-down without knowing the dynamics of the voters or ground game in the district.

        "Yup" is a throw-away line and is pretty evident of the level of thought put into local races.

        •  Bingo! There seems to be a widespread belief (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Seneca Doane, petral

          among some here that there is some sort of national influence, a strict party creed, on House and Senate members that must answer at some point to the actual voters in their district or state.

          We see a form of that when we see "we must make (Pelosi/Reid/Chair of any committee)" do something or complaints that a zip code is required to leave a message. Those are chamber offices and leadership's constituents are the caucus or houses as a whole. As individuals the only people they have to answer to are the voters in their districts or states and, unfortunately, some big contributors. The eternal reality of representative bodies is that they represent parochial interests and society.

          The diarist put it very well:

          Square One: what we want is the most progressive representative in Congress possible from each district.

          The "bluest" person you are going to get out of many a district and some states would be right wing in a many a "blue" constituency on some key issues. Refusal to settle for the best we can get, someone sharing Democratic ideals on most key issues, puts us into the catastrophe facing the GOP now. One only has to read Newsweek's Why Rush is Wrong by a wailing conservative, David Frum, to see that. A party that requires a strict creed and shuns those with any deviation is what Frum concludes this paragraph describing:

          In the days since I stumbled into this controversy, I've received a great deal of e-mail. (Most of it on days when Levin or Hannity or Hugh Hewitt or Limbaugh himself has had something especially disobliging to say about me.) Most of these e-mails say some version of the same thing: if you don't agree with Rush, quit calling yourself a conservative and get out of the Republican Party. There's the perfect culmination of the outlook Rush Limbaugh has taught his fans and followers: we want to transform the party of Lincoln, Eisenhower and Reagan into a party of unanimous dittoheads—and we don't care how much the party has to shrink to do it. That's not the language of politics. It's the language of a cult.

          The only foes that threaten America are the enemies at home, and those are ignorance, superstition, and incompetence. [Elbert Hubbard]

          by pelagicray on Thu Apr 02, 2009 at 03:12:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (153)
  • Community (73)
  • 2016 (52)
  • Elections (50)
  • Bernie Sanders (45)
  • Environment (38)
  • Climate Change (37)
  • Culture (36)
  • Hillary Clinton (34)
  • Republicans (33)
  • Science (31)
  • Education (30)
  • Media (30)
  • Civil Rights (29)
  • Barack Obama (28)
  • Law (24)
  • Labor (22)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (22)
  • Economy (21)
  • Congress (21)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site