Skip to main content

This is the letter I would like the President and the Democratic party to hear right now.

Mr. President and Rahm (because I know this is your bullcrap too),

Joe Lieberman betrayed the democratic base in several ways and the voters, YOUR voters,  worked to remove him from the party.  Your response was to join Bill Clinton campaigning for Joe Lieberman and to welcome him back into his power and privilege as an "independent" in the Senate.  While there, he betrayed the voters again by threatening to filibuster the public option and medicare expansion. . . among other things.

Blanche Lincoln betrayed the democratic base in several ways including by threatening to filibuster the public option which you claimed to support (but those darn conservative senators were preventing 60 votes. .  right Rahm?).  The voters, YOUR voters worked to primary her out of the party.  Your response was to join Bill Clinton campaigning for Blanche Lincoln where she squeaked back into her power and privilege in the senate..  My prediction is that both of these people will betray us (and what you will CLAIM to want but gosh darn it 60 votes blah blah bullcrap) again.

Mr. President, Rahm . . .you Bill Clinton and the Democratic party leadership no longer represent me and my interests (if you ever did).  Not only am I considering dropping the Democratic party, I do not trust your judgment any longer.  I will have a very hard time voting for you or anyone you, or Bill Clinton, endorse ever again.


Roy Plisko

Originally posted to Plisko on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM PDT.

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

  •  is this a GBCW diary? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  Its called incumbancy and it is a perk of being (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sun dog, jsfox

    elected first.

    Blanch was the incumbant.  As such she gets the President's endorsement (assuming he is of her party) and the endorsement of the party leadership.

    Challengers have to fight their way through the thickets, hope to pick up enough support and make a breakthrough (as Obama did over Hillery).

    Had Blanch lost the primary, you can rest assured that the Dem leadership including Clinton and Obama would have been there for him, endorsing his campaign and cutting commercials for him.

    Don't take it personally.  Just because the endorsed Blanch doesn't mean they hate you.

    All evils are equal when they are extreme. - Pierre Corneille

    by LiberalCanuck on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 10:22:12 AM PDT

    •  Wait (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ruff Limblog

      So they endorse someone who has screwed me but I shouldn't take it personally because it's just the way politics works?

      The way politics works, in my view,  is you tell the Senator that is threatening a filibuster that you WON'T endorse them if they have a primary challenger.  You don't go giving them election favors after they just obstructed. . . and then make obnoxious comments about the people who were trying to use the democratic process.

      •  You do if you think she is going to win the... (0+ / 0-)

        primary.  Then she might win reelection and you have burned your bridges to her.  Maybe she crosses the floor and joins the Republicans.  Maybe she declares herself and independent and votes against other programs just out of spite.

        An elected representative has be screw up pretty big time to void getting the endorsement of the party brass.  That person will have had to have been caught in an ethics violation or some corruption scandal.  Even then, sometimes they still get the endorsment.

        And some anonymous "aide" sending a twitter about wasting campaign funds on a hopeless cause isn't really the same as "making obnoxious comments" about primary challengers.

        All evils are equal when they are extreme. - Pierre Corneille

        by LiberalCanuck on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 11:53:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The comments were about unions (0+ / 0-)

          So the Senator never burns bridges by angering the base and going against the party when it comes to votes in the Senate but we all burn our bridges if we hold her accountable when it comes to supporting her?  What about burning bridges with the base?  Do you think being a pragmatist will help when they all get decimated in the mid terms because the base is sick of their good old boy(and girl) arrogance?  You are describing the politics that led us to where we are, not the politics that should be fixing it.

          The obnoxious comment was a White House staffer, published in Politico and it was directed at the unions and the progressives not the challenger.  It snidely told them that they just wasted their time and money by going up against the Democratic establishment when they could have given the money to people the establishment wanted.  It's obnoxious and it flies in the face of the democratic process.

  •  A word of advice... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    You'll come across as less of a moron if you learn how to spell the names of the people you're complaining about.

  •  The WDC Judges (0+ / 0-)

    would like to thank you for your entry. We'll let you know how you fared in the contest  . . .  at some point. . . maybe.

    In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

    by jsfox on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 10:29:20 AM PDT

  •  uhm.... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    goObama, sheddhead, jsfox, itzik shpitzik

    If you're writing a letter that's co-addressed to the President's Chief of Staff, the least you can do is spell his name right.

    Also, Barack Obama - along with virtually every other Democrat in the Senate - supported Joe Lieberman in the primary in CT. When Ned Lamont won the primary (and then proceeded to go on vacation), Barack Obama - along with virtually every other Democrat in the Senate - endorsed Lamont.

    As for Blanche Lincoln, she's a tough enough vote to get as it is on our issues, and we've seen what a thorn in the side a single Senator can be (see: Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, Jim Bunning) when he/she wants to really screw things up. How likely do you think she would have been to vote for anything on the White House's agenda if they'd endorsed Bill Halter in the primary?

    What have you done for DC statehood today? Call your Rep and Senators and demand action.

    by mistersite on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 10:35:46 AM PDT

    •  Thanks (0+ / 0-)

      I wrote this in anger and I didn't read it closely enough before posting and then the cable guy was here shutting down the internet before I could fix things.  Thanks for pointing out the typos.

      Fair enough that they campaigned for Lamont. . .  after they were forced to against their will.

      •  Also (0+ / 0-)

        I'm also sure they looked very authentic to the voters in Connecticut when they started out by saying "Joe is your man" and then switched to running against Joe and saying "Ted is your man"  What kind of endorsement does it really provide when then endorsers will switch from one guy to the other based on nothing that has anything to do with the candidates?

  •  Dopn't worry Blanche will lose (0+ / 0-)

    big time in November. Lets see how much the White House gloats over that drubbing!

    •  And so would have Halter. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      goObama, ybruti

      Nate gave the Dems. no matter who it was, an 8% chance in November of holding Arkansas.

      So in the meantime for the rest of Blanche's time the WH house needs her to be somewhat of a friend. Had they backed Halter in the primary she would probably been a bigger pain in the ass just out of spite

      In the choice between changing ones mind and proving there's no need to do so, most people get busy on the proof.

      by jsfox on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 10:46:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Don't write off Blanch as a loss just yet (0+ / 0-)

    The anti-incumbant wave that was reported in the media did not materialize.

    Do not expect similar predictions to come true this November.

  •  Has any president openly endorsed a primary chall (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    None of us liked it. I'm sure conservatives were angry at GW for backing Arlen in Pennsylvania six years ago. But of leading Washington is working with the establishment. If you didn't like Blanche Lincoln before, imagine a lame-duck center ostracized by her president but still in office until January.

    Finding better Democrats is our job. Working with elected officials to progress an agenda is his. We can try to get him better Senators, but until then he needs to go to war with the army he has.

    Please check out my blog Rantings From Florida. Someone has to do it.

    by Southernlib on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 11:09:26 AM PDT

  •  I feel the same way (0+ / 0-)

    and it's not a crime to feel that way.

    Language is wine upon the lips. -Virginia Woolf

    by valadon on Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 11:18:05 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site