I just received an email asking for money, from the DCCC. So I logged on to their website to tell them what I told their phone flacks: "e... s...".
Then I checked their blog. They are taking serious flack. See the crap below the fold.
Van Hollen: Bush Republicans in Trouble in '08
Posted by Brandon English
Thursday, November 1, 2007 at 3:14 PM
In a meeting with reporters, DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen made it clear that Republicans choosing to stand with President Bush and against a New Direction will be held accountable at the polls in '08:
"People recognize that the Bush administration is very unpopular for standing in the way of change," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen, head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. "George Bush and his legacy will be on the ballot in 2008."
The American people are tired of the Bush era and want the change that only a Democratic President with a strong Democratic Majority can provide:
A new survey released by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found that Democrats fared better among Americans, with 48 percent believing they could bring needed change compared to 26 percent for Republicans.
TrackBack (0) | Digg | Digg | del.icio.us | Reddit| Reddit
You are not on the Stakeholder home page.
Click here to read more running commentary on the DCCC blog.
Comments
"New Direction", Mr. Van Hollen?
Meaning the "New Direction" taken by the Democratic Congressional Majority we voted for in 2006?
The "New Direction" of refusing to publicly challenge the obvious misdeeds of a corrupt administration? (what are you guys Afraid Of?)
The "New Direction" of continuing the occupation of two sovereign foreign nations?
The "New Direction" of designating elements of a foreign nation's military as a "terrorist organizations, to be used as an excuse to spread war to still another sovereign foreign nation that poses us no threat?
The "New Direction" of now "legalized" warrantless spying on Americans?
The "New Direction" of continuing to allow the insertion of pork spending "earmarks" in bills Congress has already voted on?
The "New Direction" of continuing to allow the imprisonment of people in some Guantanomo 'Twilight Zone' of no formal charges, no access to counsel and no Constitutionally mandated protection of Habeas Corpus?
None of this sounds to me like the "New Direction" the Democratic candidates promised in their 2006 campaigns, but it sounds exactly like the "New Direction" those candidates have delivered since we elected them to a majority.
So why should we, by believing your assurances, willingly submit ourselves to that form of insanity that does the same thing the same way, over and over, yet continues to expect a different result?
Posted by: Severely Disappointed Democrat | November 1, 2007 4:31 PM
The last commenter wrote:
"New Direction", Mr. Van Hollen?
Meaning the "New Direction" taken by the Democratic Congressional Majority we voted for in 2006?
You might try blaming the Republicans that remain in Congress and President Bush. In 2008, don't be surprised if voters hold them accountable for obstructing the will of the people, and vote them out in far greater numbers than they did in 2006.
Posted by: George Ortega | November 2, 2007 3:17 AM
Great idea George.
I'll blame Bush and the minority Republicans for the Democrats either (best case) not pursuing the goals they said they would in 2006, or (worst case) actually implementing the opposite of what they promised.
Sorry.
That doesn't work for me any more.
I listened to what the Dem candidate for Congress in my district promised in 2006, and we voted him in, as the first Dem from this district in DECADES, and the former county sheriff turned around and voted to 'legalize' warrantless spying by the executive branch, in spite of having campaigned against That Very Activity!
So tell me..., how can I blame a Republican who wasn't in office for that one?
It's not the only example.
See how the Christian Science Monitor evaluates the ethics reform bill, that was supposed to do away with sweetheart spending 'earmark' deals:
One of the key venues for abuse, critics say, is "air-dropping" projects in conference. In other words, measures are added after a bill has passed both the House and Senate but before it goes back to both bodies for a final vote. That backroom tactic is what ex-lobbyist Jack Abramoff called "the favor factory." It's where former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R) of California, now serving an eight-year sentence after pleading guilty to corruption charges, linked earmarks to bribes without scrutiny.
Senate majority leader Harry Reid told the Senate parliamentarian that the new law only applied to spending bills, not to authorization or tax bills. That means that members had no opportunity to challenge specific projects on the floor of the House or Senate.
In a Sept. 20 letter in response, Sens. Reid and Feinstein wrote that there are "sound policy reasons" for treating authorization and spending bills differently. "Stronger safeguards are appropriate when Congress actually spends taxpayer money," they wrote. "But when Congress passes an authorizing bill, it is simply expressing a goal."
But critics note that the most infamous earmark of all, the $223 million "Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska, was attached to an authorizing bill, not a spending bill.
"A lot of the promises of transparency just haven't come true," says Ed Frank, vice president of public affairs of Americans for Prosperity, which led a national campaign for earmark reform. "Their addiction caught up with their rhetoric. They find it's a lot easier to talk about getting earmarks under control than to actually do it."
"Under the OPEN Government Act that the president signed into law, everyone thought that the ability for senators to raise a point of order against earmarks added in conference applied to all bills – appropriations, authorization, tax bills," says Tom Schatz, president of Citizens Against Government Waste, a budget watchdog group in Washington.
"Now, senators know that they can add projects with impunity to the authorization bill and no one can object. That's business as usual," he adds.
Yeah, a lot of promises just haven't come true!! That's business as usual!!
You can go on pushing for such Republicans because they're dressed up as Democrats, and drink and cheer when they win their elections and then they go on to act just like the Republicans they are, but-it'll-be-OK-because-they're-'Democrats'...
I won't be a party to that any more.
Posted by: Severely Disappointed Democrat | November 2, 2007 1:03 PM
Another example of how Democrats are acting like Republicans, blaming Bush for what they've done, and hoping we'll be duped (again) by it:
Senators Hillary Clinton, Dick Durbin, Dianne Feinstein, Herb Kohl, Byron Dorgan, Jack Reed, Max Baucus, Debbie Stabenow, Daniel Akaka, Thomas Carper, Robert Casey, Jay Rockefeller, Patty Murray, and Barbara Mikulski, every one a Democrat, voted on Sept. 26 to urge Bush to rattle his saber at Iran by declaring the Revolutionary Guard wing of the Iranian military "a foreign terrorist organization". (Actually 29 of the 51 Democrats in the Senate voted to request that Bush take this provocative action!)
http://www.senate.gov/...
Yesterday, every one of the Senators named above signed a letter to George Bush stating: "We are writing to express serious concern with the provocative statements and actions stemming from your administration with respect to possible U.S. military action in Iran. These comments are counterproductive and undermine efforts to resolve tensions with Iran through diplomacy."
"Undermine efforts to resolve...through DIPLOMACY."??!!?? The sort of diplomacy they recommended to Bush a little over a MONTH Ago, that said to deal with them as "terrorists"?
WHICH way do they want to play it???
DO they even KNOW???
ARE they just playing Electoral Politics with such an important foreign policy matter???
One that could cost thousands of lives??? Billions and billions of dollars???
Based on the evidence at hand, I have to think that is the case, and I can't support people who would engage in that.
Posted by: Severely Disappointed Democrat | November 2, 2007 3:41 PM
Severely Disappointed Democrat states:
"Great idea George.
I'll blame Bush and the minority Republicans for the Democrats either (best case) not pursuing the goals they said they would in 2006, or (worst case) actually implementing the opposite of what they promised.
Sorry.
That doesn't work for me any more."
You should know that we Democrats champion causes supporting both the will and the welfare of the people that the Republicans have steadfastly opposed for the entire 20th century and the complete beginning of this new century. You need to face the very simple political reality that numbers determine the course of legislation, and accept that as long as there are enough Republicans in Congress to stop the will of the people, legislation strongly expressing that will is DOA.
The American people's will was most strongly expressed when Roosevelt took over and instituted the New Deal. You might know that in 1928, before Roosevelt came to power, Republicans held 56 of the 96 Senate Seats. When Roosevelt won the presidency in 1933 and Democrats took control of the Senate, the Republicans were reduced to just 36 seats. By the time of Roosevelt's re-election in 1936, Republicans held only 16 Senate seats. Republican loss of power in the House over those same years was comparable.
We cannot do great things for the people without the numbers, and I'm confident that the American people are ready for us to do great things again. But not until the Republican ranks in both houses are decimated, and Democrats also hold the White House.
Posted by: George Ortega | November 2, 2007 5:27 PM
"We cannot do great things for the people without the numbers, and I'm confident that the American people are ready for us to do great things again. But not until the Republican ranks in both houses are decimated, and Democrats also hold the White House."
It's not about numbers...it's about standing up to Bush and Cheney. How many more of our troops going to die because you care more about '08 then them or their families? When are you going to get it?! It is not about '08...it's about now!
Posted by: pj98rider | November 2, 2007 8:17 PM
I used to be a Democrat. Then they decided to try to out do the Republicans.
Now I will register as an independent.
The leadership are sheep, doing the bidding of their corporate contributors.
Fortunately, I can afford to put solar power on my roof and get off the grid.
Unfortunately, most Americans can't. And the national Democrats don't give a rats a**.
$20,000 of my money has gone down this rat hole over 20 years.
Bye bye.
Posted by: drdave | November 3, 2007 1:24 AM