Skip to main content

Today, TeacherKen had a great diary highlighting and supplementing EJ Dionne's piece on the need for a populist-progressive revolt in our politics.

I want to add some insight from the ground, as a young person that self-identifies as a populist progressive, and as someone I believe represents the overarching views of a new generation of liberalism, the core group that must vote if Democrats are to have any chance of winning. I've cross-posted this from my blog.:

Going to school in Syracuse gave me an unique perspective on politics. On one side were my liberal, progressive peers, the filmmakers and artists and writers who didn’t worry about someone’s sexuality or religion or race, and, in theory at least because they all grew up comfortably, believed in helping out the poor.

Then there was the rest of the city, crumbling from within years after the Erie Canal stopped bringing business and industry moved to warmer and cheaper climes. Poverty was all around. I got involved by starting a short-lived student group that worked with the school’s labor union, to agitate for a better contract. I spent a lot of time with campus workers, filming them as they worked and listening to their stories of just trying to get by, of looking for fairness.

Borne of this experience was a more fully formed populist-progressive political view, my belief that what is economically right is socially right, because true compassion doesn’t stop where it’s easy. It’s not often that artists and creative types truly come together with the working class, but when they do, there is generally a comity that is formed thanks to mutual underdog spirit.

So I’ve been agitating for this kind of alliance for years now, though the conspiracy of starting real life and the discouraging insulated cluelessness of Washington has limited my tactics and effort. But as EJ Dionne writes, perhaps this is the moment when underdogs from all sides come together to fight the power grab in Washington that is threatening our democracy and very existence.

Now, I’m not talking as a teabagger. As Dionne points out elsewhere in this article, that is a corporate-sponsored astroturf movement whose organizers would blast back years of populist-progressive change to hasten corporate dominance in Washington. But as exciting as the ascendancy of Scott Brown is for them, this could weaken the tea party movement and open the door further for a populist-progressive alliance.

The rank and file teabaggers, I can sympathize with. They’ve been taken advantage of for so long, had their representatives vote to send their jobs overseas and 401K’s into the Hudson and the value of their homes straight into the ground, with the rest of their money going to line banker and CEO pockets. Their activism, however misguided, is borne out of frustration.

But now, they must be steaming, seeing this decision that further allows corporate dominance of our politics. Except that, guys like Dick Armey that run their movement, must be thrilled — they believe in jettisoning any government regulation and enriching the 1% as much as they can. Will there be a groundswell of anger and a full revolt between the rank and file and the leaders of the tea party movement?

If so, they can come join a populist-progressive alliance. Progressives often look from their Upper East Side apartments and want to help the less affluent below, sympathizing and wanting to understand, if not fully able to do so. I find myself, if not currently financially but at least from childhood experience, on that side.

The populists want to help themselves and their friends and families get justice and fairness, to help them achieve the American dream. In terms of ultimate goals, they are largely the same.

It can be awkward, for sure, this alliance. If we’re to truly come together, progressives will have to stop laughing at PeopleofWalmart.com and populists will have to be okay with Lady Gaga. But we’ve reached a moment in our dying democracy that necessitates a coming together of disparate sides, to fight for an overarching vision. Social and economic justice — universal healthcare, good paying jobs that stay in America, mortgages that don’t escalate at any moment and leave hardworking tenants homeless.

This was the Democrat promise, and thus far, it hasn’t worked out as such. I believe most Democrats in Washington want to do the right thing, but the corporate money hungry few, like Joe Liberman and Evan Bayh and Ben Nelson, get in the way of President Obama’s agenda, though his timidity isn’t helpful, either.

When Obama spoke about bringing America together, it made sense because we thought this was the kind of movement he was talking about — people of all different backgrounds in America, fighting for a better day. We don’t care about bipartisanship if it means a few corporate Democrats are coming together with fat, CEO-fed Republicans to stymie change.

If the current gang in DC isn’t going to understand, much less deliver, that change, we have to make it. I’d be loathe to vote for a Republican, and my natural inclination is to challenge corporate Democrats in primaries. Third parties don’t often work in America, but there must be some way to bring the jilted, wayward sometimes-right leaning populists together with the union movement and liberal progressives.

Maybe that’s fighting and agitating members of both parties to fight for certain laws and regulations that limit theirs and corporate power in Washington, to create freer elections. Without uniting under a party, it may not be a long term movement, but we could at least assure that our principles will truly be debated and instilled by the winning candidate. Maybe it’s fighting corporate Democrats, since they’re the party in power, and creating a populist-progressive force in that party. Maybe it is a third party.

I don’t know the exact direction the movement will take, but Dionne is right — there’s a potential tsunami coming, and corporate politicians may want enjoy their power while they can, before they have to start running for their political lives.

Originally posted to CuseDem on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 12:25 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  What about me who laughs at both Lady Gaga and (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, The Raven, mos1133

    Peopleofwalmart?  

    I am a progressive who considers myself a strong populist, probably because I spent a great deal of my adult life in the working class and clawing my way into the middle class.  Working class people get no breaks and being poor is an expensive proposition.

    I keep saying that through populism we can make common cause with the right, who continue to be misled into voting against their own economic interests.

    Repubs - the people in power are not secretly plotting against you. They don't need to. They already beat you in public. (Bill Maher)

    by Sychotic1 on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 12:31:44 PM PST

    •  there is no "common cause" with right (0+ / 0-)

      There is no tactical, or strategic advantage, or desirability whatsoever, to a coalition, or any other association, let alone cooperation, with the right, even within the Democratic Party, let alone with the Republicans and peripheral rightwing "parties".

      The right is the self-declared enemy of everything we want and need, and they should all just eat shit and die.

      Fuck the right.  They are no longer politically correct in this country.

      They should be purged, and suppressed, from all levers of power, democratically, electorally, in 2010 and 2012.

      "...a printing press is worth 10,000 rifles..." Ho Chi Minh

      by Radical def on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 01:42:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Are you serious? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sychotic1

        You are advocating a complete repression of people just because of their political beliefs?

        Please explain yourself, that is pretty serious stuff to be throwing around. I have no problem offering an HR for that kind of rhetoric, as it is some truly dangerous language there.

        •  what is it about "democratic", and "electoral" (0+ / 0-)

          that you object to?

          btw...I would hasten to add, that I was talking about self-identified "right", especially those pursuing positions of power.

          OTH, I would agree with the need to engage working people, including those most inundated in right wing line, on the issues.

          I just felt kinda compelled to rant a little about the meme of "common cause with the right", which kinda freaked me out.  I am NOT interested in any kind of "coalition" with any elements of the right.  Fuck a whole bunch of "bipartisanship", too.

          The "common cause" will be defined by the left, from now on.  Fuck the right.  They can either get on the bus, and help us, to save the planet, for justice and peace, or they can get kicked to the curb.  The right are no longer politically correct in this country.

          That may sound harsh, heh, but everything will be alot nicer than it was under the vicious regime of the right.

          Indeed, we will offer much more substantial incentives, for going green and helping to rebuild our nation in a more principled manner, than any workers, or stupid rednecks, for that matter, ever got from the right wing regime.

          I am confident that any genuine grassroots opposition to the new revolutionary green paradigm will melt away, as people see it roll out, and find that it's not about going back to the stone age, lol, but will actually be more comfortable, convenient, safe, affordable, sustainable, cheaper, and even pleasant and pretty, as well.

          So, I'm not necessarily saying "fuck the stupid rednecks", per se.  I am one myownself, LOL, except I'm a progressive, on the left, and I have no more patience for fools who want to run right wing reactionary conservative or "Libertarian" bullshit.  They tend to be beyond reason, and I have better, more important things to do, like dealing with the more progressive elements of the community and workforce, most of whom already have a clue, and are getting on the bus.

          "...a printing press is worth 10,000 rifles..." Ho Chi Minh

          by Radical def on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 02:05:26 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I see, it just sounded (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sychotic1, Radical def

            a little bit extreme, but I get what you are saying. When I hear purge, I think of the really bad kind. And considering when progressives were called traitors and there were calls to string us up if we opposed the wars, inflammatory language gets my ears perked up and only bad thoughts come to mind.

            But I feel you. I try to convince my conservative family members that they really are progressives, but are just scared into the whole Democrats only want to tax us and take our guns thing...

            •  Yeah, to the extent you have the time, patience (0+ / 0-)

              to keep explaining the obvious...

              Respect and consideration, as long as it's mutual, are good to maintain, even when disagreeing, especially with co-workers, friends, neighbors, family...community.

              But I guess I do tend to take a pretty hard line, in direct correlation to how hard line right the debate gets.

              I often feel I must triangulate my time and energy, to optimize material results.  If they just aren't getting it, I tend to move on.

              I used to spend a lot more time, going around and around, trying to reason with irrational people...not so much, anymore.

              But don't let a burned out old grouch keep you from trying, heh...

              Re: "repression"...I too remember not only pervasive contrived hostile rhetoric and social attitudes from the right, but also outright military and "para-military" attacks against anyone considered "too" left, going way back.

              But this not about getting "even", or revenge, now.  It's not about being mean to anyone, or grinding them down into the dirt, or hurting or killing them, like they have always done to us.

              We'll treat them way better than they ever treated us.

              I'm not saying they should be dragged out into the street and shot out of hand, like they tend to say about us.

              They should get a fair trial first.  But they can't just be allowed to run amok.  

              Criteria for that clearly must be democratically determined, and certainly not subject to personal whim or vigilante action.  

              I say bring FISA, the Patriot Act, and the black helicopters (full of Asian UN troops, heh), and throw open the FEMA camps, for the most recalcitrant elements, and those who have committed heinous crimes against humanity.

              The right can scream bloody murder, about their "right" to be racist, sexist, eco-raping, murderous ripoff capitalist pig warmongers, and their "freedom" to call for political assassination, mass murder and civil war, but I'm not buying any of that crap.

              The right must be resolutely suppressed.  Those who resist the popular democratic mandate militarily must be suppressed militarily.

              Call me hardline, but revolution demands no less, anywhere.

              The right always screams "oppression!", for not being allowed to run amok.

              Fuck them.

              This is all about democracy.

              "...a printing press is worth 10,000 rifles..." Ho Chi Minh

              by Radical def on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 03:36:08 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  thank you for your perspective (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1

    and your words...I agree with you that there's a "movement" brewing...right now we're letting the corporate tea-baggers lay claim to that movement...but the more they align themselves with Dick Armey and his corporate friends and the racist/secessionist part of the movement..the more they will be alienate the rest of the movement who want what's best for America. That's where there needs to be a progressive movement for them to turn to.

    •  the one (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sychotic1, mos1133

      thing i can't quite figure out is how we get them to vote democrat, when the democrats are half the problem. a third party seems impossible, so perhaps we have to turn to primaries in our party, to elect populist democratic nominees they can support?

      •  the primaries are the best way to do it (0+ / 0-)

        IMO...hell...no one thinks the lifers of the dem party are in there to make a change...they are in there to protect themselves...that's it...incumbents better look to get clobbered this next election...the longer they've been there the worse they'll do...is my prediction....but the fight for the party begins in the primaries.

  •  Step one of a populist-progressive revolt (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    luckylizard, mos1133, Zotz, moonpal

    Get young people of voting age to show up and vote.  Only one third of them now vote.  Increased numbers of voting at the polls means increased political power.  That is how our democracy works.

    Politicians understand two things only: votes and money.  

  •  I thought the people of wal-mart... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    luckylizard, mos1133

    were the ones buying the Lady Gaga cd's.

    Anyway, good diary. The thing is wedge issues. They work for a reason. But when the economy is shit maybe they don't matter as much. I don't know how to handle them and I haven't seen a good strategy.

    Sometimes you win. Sometimes you lose. Sometimes it rains.

    by gooners on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 12:42:28 PM PST

  •  People hate on Ralph Nader (0+ / 0-)

    but this speech deserves to be heard and acted on:

    At the end of the speech, he mentions two websites worth seeing as well:

    tamethecorporation.org

    corporatepolicy.org

    Corporate Democrats are the velvet glove on the Republican iron fist.

    by Sagebrush Bob on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 12:45:15 PM PST

    •  Nader is a dishonest liar who took (0+ / 0-)

      Republican money.

      •  Any argument with the substance of what he said? (0+ / 0-)

        Obviously not since you clearly didn't listen to any of it. However, if you were to listen, I'd LOVE to know where you disagree.

        Corporate Democrats are the velvet glove on the Republican iron fist.

        by Sagebrush Bob on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 12:56:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Well, I'm inclined to give benefit of doubt... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sychotic1

        Although I do agree that Nader made some very serious counter-revolutionary errors, which ultimately handed the power over to fascism, he has also been a brave and loyal fighter for working class interests all of his life, so...I want to cut him some slack, and extend a hand of solidarity anyway.

        If he would only now step up and say he was wrong, or, even just ignore that, and call on all Greens to now join the Democratic Party, and to help seize the power in this country, via a much more substantial Progressive (and green) Democrat Caucus, for the explicit purpose of purging as many Blue Dogs and Republicans as we can, democratically, electorally, in 2010 and 2012...

        I would be willing to forgive Nader, and would definitely very strongly support an appointment by Obama, to a powerful cabinet position.

        Just because he was wrong in what he did does not mean that his entire analysis, and position about what we need to do, going forward, should all just be thrown out the window.  

        Nader is a valuable national resource, whom I would very much like to see rehabilitated.

        "...a printing press is worth 10,000 rifles..." Ho Chi Minh

        by Radical def on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 01:00:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Nader doesn't deserve it (0+ / 0-)

          Nader has busted unions, is responsible for the PIRG/GCI model of politics, paid his own employees very low wages with little benefits, took Republican money, and invested in the stocks that he attacked Gore for owning.

          •  Not aware of these charges... (0+ / 0-)

            Perhaps there should be a tribunal.

            I'm old school, but not up on the latest.  My recollections of PIRG are good, more or less.

            Whether they were, or are the best, I'm not so sure, heh...but I saw nothing particularly objectionable about them, or their issues, except that they did seem kinda...moderate, and straight arrow, heh.

            Not like the other much more zealous environmental activists, but effective in the venues they worked, it seemed.

            Anyway, I'm sure there may well be much about Nader, and his organizations and practices, that could be legitimately criticized.

            But I'm not so sure this is the time for that.  I'm more concerned with the real enemy, on the right.

            I think I could settle for the same rationale Obama has given for embracing, or, at least, employing some of the more rightwing operatives that he has, for various positions...namely, that Obama is now in charge, and that he will direct and supervise them, rather than, say, freakin' Rove, Cheney, Bush, et al.

            I think that after 2010, we could expect a lot of those more old-school conventional throwback appointments might be held up for re-evaluation, and likely replaced with more progressive individuals.

            But then, lol...I'd also like to see Rev. Wright, Ayers, and all those other previous "controversial" appointments and associates of Obama's, all "rehabilitated", and brought into the government.

            They are all valuable national resources, whom we would do well to have working on the many urgent national priorities that we now face.  

            Pipe dreams of "socialist utopia" are not going to happen though, without a much more substantial Progressive Caucus plurality, and a lot less Blue Dogs and Republicans in Congress, and all down the ladders of power, to the local levels.

            And then, once the right is purged from all levers of power, and suppressed, democratically, electorally, and we have a Progressive Caucus coalition super-majority, will it be socialist utopia, yet?

            I think not.  But we'll be on a much better footing to press the contradictions, than with a fifth column rightwing monopoly corporate fascist anti-democratic opposition shoestring majority plurality, blocking, delaying and sabotaging motion.

            Personally, I do not subscribe to the "theory" that we "need" a fascist opposition, in order to be democratic.  The right must be resolutely suppressed.

            All Power to the People!

            Seize the Power!

            All Out for 2010 and 2012!

            Bring the Better Democrats!

            "...a printing press is worth 10,000 rifles..." Ho Chi Minh

            by Radical def on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 01:35:34 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  No, no that ain't gonna happen (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1

    progressives will have to stop laughing at PeopleofWalmart.com

    Impossible. Just ain't gonna happen. And I don't like Lady Gaga, either.

    Every day's another chance to stick it to The Man. - dls.

    by The Raven on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 12:45:23 PM PST

    •  We laugh at peopleofwalmart because (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Raven

      it is funny.  And my sister went through the drive-thru last week in her footie pajamas, so we are not completely immune either and still we laugh our butts off.

      Repubs - the people in power are not secretly plotting against you. They don't need to. They already beat you in public. (Bill Maher)

      by Sychotic1 on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 01:15:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Well (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Corporate Dog

    The rank and file teabaggers, I can sympathize with. They’ve been taken advantage of for so long, had their representatives vote to send their jobs overseas and 401K’s into the Hudson and the value of their homes straight into the ground, with the rest of their money going to line banker and CEO pockets. Their activism, however misguided, is borne out of frustration.

    If you were to honestly ask them what they thought of the Democrats the vast majority of them would probably say that they vote Republican because they don't feel like the Democrats offer them anything but higher taxes for social programs that don't benefit them. They think that the Democrats care more about poor people in the inner city and abstract social issues like abortion and gay rights than their own immediate needs. They also would tell you that most Democrats look down on them for being "stupid" and "voting against their interests".

    Progressives often look from their Upper East Side apartments and want to help the less affluent below, sympathizing and wanting to understand, if not fully able to do so. I find myself, if not currently financially but at least from childhood experience, on that side.

    Here is the problem. What you just wrote there sounds pretty condescending, albeit unintended. From your Upper East Side upbringing, per your post, you are swooping from your penthouse down to save the "working class". While many progressives from that type of background come in with the full intention of "trying to help", they do it from a condescending perspective of "trying to save these people" because, in their opinions, though they won't say it, they believe that they are "incapable of savings themselves". It's almost similar to Kipling's "Carry the White Man's Burden", coming into the "poor and dispossessed working class and minority neighborhoods to show them the way to salvation".

    And I can understand why those voters hate liberals. They don't want these "saviors from the Upper East Side" to come in their neighborhoods and treat them in a paternalistic fashion. They don't need some highly educated Ph.D from some expensive East Coast Ivy Leaugue University or some other private college lecturing them about "what's best for them" and "what their interests should be". The problem is that too many liberals come to them with an attitude that they're "better" than those people.

    •  I don't (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sychotic1

      live on the upper east side. i live in working class brooklyn. i grew up solidly middle class, with extended family that was more affluent.

      and what i'm saying is exactly that — we need to somehow marry well intentioned cadillac liberals and real working class people, so that the affluent liberals can understand those they think they're trying to help, not speak down to them and speak past them.

      i think working class people are much more capable of understanding what they need, and fighting for it. but it'll take people from all backgrounds coming together to make change. you're just perpetuating stereotypes and the divisions between us all instead of thinking of ways for people to come together.

  •  I'm afraid there are larger forces to overcome. (0+ / 0-)

    Many of the tea party populists are CONVINCED that government exists solely to take their wealth, and funnel it to "welfare queens and illegals".

    It's a conservative meme that they're not going to just cast off. The right has pushed such memes for DECADES, because if everyone could see who was truly responsible for the plight of the middle-to-lower-class, then how would they ever attract any voters?

    The hate also helps distract these voters from the empty promises that they're sold by such candidates.

    I'm on the same page with my wingnut father about how the bank bailouts are a shitty use of tax-payer money. But he just doesn't see the corporations and banks as a threat to our way of life.

    If we penalize the wealthy, you see, they'll just dissolve my job. It's these mythical beings who have eight-or-nine-uncared-for children, and rake in HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of dollars worth of public assistance that I should be wary of.

    I'm not sure HOW you overcome that programming.

    Regards,
    Corporate Dog

    -----
    We didn't elect Obama to be an expedient president. We elected him to be a great one. -- Eugene Robinson

    by Corporate Dog on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 12:54:45 PM PST

    •  I have convinced quite a few conservatives (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      brushysage

      away from those memes, in fact it is sort of my specialty because I used to be a republican.

      Whenever a conservative talks about people taking advantage of the system (fill in Welfare, Disability, etc.) I agree with them that it is awful that there are people who would cheat what is meant to be a safety net to help people when they are at their lowest.  Then I say something to this effect, "We should really put more safeguards in place against fraud in these systems, but I am not willing to scrap a system that helps 99 deserving people out of 100 just because that last guy is a crook.  I say we catch the crooks instead of letting people live in cardboard boxes and eat dog food.

      This is the gist of the message and you would be surprised with how much agreement, some grudging, some not, that I get.

      Repubs - the people in power are not secretly plotting against you. They don't need to. They already beat you in public. (Bill Maher)

      by Sychotic1 on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 01:21:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  A fair argument... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sychotic1

        ... but the counter-argument I get tends to run along the lines of "99 out of 100 are honest and hard-working? Try again."

        To take my father as an example, he literally built up everything he has from nothing. He put himself through college. He started his own businesses from scratch. He moved outside of his formal training (pharmacy) to pick up a trade (construction) that he enjoyed, excelled in, and made a lot of money from.

        And he has such little empathy for others, that he fails to see why similar paths AREN'T available to anyone who wants to just reach out and grab them. His Republicanism is almost understandable to me, though utterly misguided.

        Regards,
        Corporate Dog

        -----
        We didn't elect Obama to be an expedient president. We elected him to be a great one. -- Eugene Robinson

        by Corporate Dog on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 02:04:00 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I admit I am dealing more with (0+ / 0-)

          Republicans at the 45 and under range.  My own father is batshit crazy and believes everyone has health insurance because the emergency room has to take them.  He is on Social Security and Medicare even though he spent the majority of his working life cheating on  his taxes.

          Repubs - the people in power are not secretly plotting against you. They don't need to. They already beat you in public. (Bill Maher)

          by Sychotic1 on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 02:47:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Refreshing (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1, brushysage, Radical def

    to read and consider. It has a lot to do with local politics in every district, the quality of the candidates. Obviously Martha Chaokley was a complete dud, for instance.
      For those like me already fossilized, donating, calling and going door to door has sure been less wear and tear than getting bloody in the streets protesting Vietnam, watching cities burn throughout the 60's, watching a Republican administration condone shoot to kill of their own citizens (Kent State and elsewhere), and watching the Democratic party go down in flames as interest rates and the cost of everything went through the roof.
     Well said, solidarity is essential, best of luck.

    "America is ruled by the moral philosophy of the dollar."

    by runningdoglackey on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 12:58:30 PM PST

  •  One would think... (0+ / 0-)

    But now, they must be steaming, seeing this decision that further allows corporate dominance of our politics

    After reading the SCOTUS dissent, I came to a similar conclusion as the diarist.  Unfortunately, after actually linking up on a wing nuttery site (think it was Ron Paul's) I noticed that only one person even objected to the idea of the decision and they were quickly overtaken by hordes of pro corporation rhetoric.  Quickly swayed by inane babble.  The only question I could come away with after reading was, "am I a stupider person now"

    Like the diary and the insight from your perspective

    Tip and Rec!!

    "Do right because it is right without fear of punishment or hopes of reward"

    by cheftdp on Mon Jan 25, 2010 at 01:29:34 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site