Skip to main content

Do not believe the headlines. The Tea Party did not lose.

After the primaries on Tuesday, the post mortem began. Breitbart.com published Tea Party Grapples with Tuesday Losses, The New York Times published G.O.P. Establishment Sees Its Candidate Win North Carolina Senate Primary and CNN declared GOP establishment 1, tea party 0 after North Carolina Senate primary.

These articles give the impression that there is this great battle between establishment Republicans and the tea party. While optically that is true, it has never been the case. The tea party was an orchestration of events and people to ensure that the plutocracy was not destroyed by a charismatic president who was elected before the country was ready for him. The tea party did not begin with Rick Santelli’s rant; it was a movement waiting in the wings to be sprung when needed.

Any objective observer must concede that President Obama has accomplished a lot. Those big accomplishments were necessary to simply keep the poor and working middle class afloat as the juggernaut of unfettered capitalism was pulling them under.

However, the tea party however was poised to ensure that the most progressive side of President Obama’s policies remained unrealized. Movement members were also poised to ensure that the Republican Party remained the primary watchdog for the well-being of the plutocracy. They were the enforcers of the Powell Memo.

If one looks at where we were in 2008, when many in the plutocracy feared where we would be today, then compare it with where we actually are today, one must agree that the tea party has won. The tea party did not lose on Tuesday. Their branded candidates lost while the establishment candidates won on tea party policies. Some ask if the establishment candidates will embrace the right-wing policies as they run in the general election. The simple answer is that they won’t highlight them. However, past is prologue, and if they are elected, they will govern by these policies.

Progressives can learn much from the well-funded, well-advertised tea party astroturf movement and its blueprint. Because truth and real populist values are on the side of progressives, vast amounts of money is not essential. An open internet and engagement will suffice.

Many progressives have abandoned the Democratic Party because they feel the party has morphed into Republican-lite. They’ve gone to the Green Party, or the Justice Party, or a myriad of other parties that they believe are more in tune with their values. Many in the Occupy Wall Street movement have either grown to loathe parties or have been coerced into a strain of libertarianism that Rand Paul types are courting.

The tea party accomplished its mission within the Republican Party, ensuring that the chosen party not only stuck by tea party values, but reinforced them. It used all necessary tactics to accomplish its mission—carnal racial fears, scapegoating, distorted data and misinformation as tools.

The reality, however, is poignant. The policies that continue to stranglehold poor and working middle-class Americans are tea party policies. Many Democrats who know better and who want better simply acquiesce to these policies in an attempt to survive. Unfortunately, a few Democrats are also wards of the plutocracy.

Progressives do not need to follow the bad policies of the tea party to win. They should, however, follow the tactics—because the tactics work. Progressives must not allow the GOP to triangulate them by sectionalizing. Progressives must not allow Democrats to maintain Republican-lite stances.

The tea party ensured that the Republican Party lived up to its values—as bad as they are—by using any and all means necessary. Progressives, in turn, must use all truthful populist value-based tactics to make the Democratic Party the Progressive Party. Only then will we be able to say—as the tea party should confidently say today—mission accomplished.

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

  •  Progressive poilticians (10+ / 0-)

    standing up for actual progressive policies. That would require integrity and backbone. Heh, there's a few out there in the wliderness, like Warren and Sanders. Has a nice ring, would that be a ticket or what?

    A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

    by onionjim on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:05:42 PM PDT

    •  If you want to lose. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AlexDrew

      We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

      by nocynicism on Sun May 11, 2014 at 03:23:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  why is that? nt (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ChuckChuckerson

        A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

        by onionjim on Sun May 11, 2014 at 03:24:57 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Bernie is my hero but he is a socialist. He (3+ / 0-)

          cannot win.  I'm a liberal, hell I'm probably a socialist too but I am realistic.  Why give the right a hammer?

          We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

          by nocynicism on Sun May 11, 2014 at 03:39:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  well that reduces (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dallasdoc

            politics to name calling. There are "debates" too. heh. Dave Gregory, oh, great.

            A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

            by onionjim on Sun May 11, 2014 at 04:53:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  We need Bernie and EW in the senate. (0+ / 0-)

              We are not powerless!! "Activism is the rent I pay for living on this planet."– Alice Walker

              by nocynicism on Sun May 11, 2014 at 05:31:49 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  It's not name calling... (0+ / 0-)

              ...because Bernie Sanders is indeed a Socialist -- that's how he identifies his political affiliation.  He's not a Democrat, but merely chooses to caucus with the Senate Democrats since the alternative of caucusing with the Republicans would make no sense.

              Placing someone who is a self-proclaimed Socialist and who isn't a member of the Democratic party on our presidential ticket probably wouldn't be a winning strategy.

              If Democrats proclaim the the Earth is round and Republicans insist it is flat, we will shortly see a column in the Washington Post claiming the the earth is really a semi-circle.

              by TexasTom on Sun May 11, 2014 at 06:39:57 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Warren yes, Sanders no (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chi, bartcopfan

      As much as I like Bernie he's terrible in a debate.

      I saw Michelle Bachman walk all over him a couple months ago. If you can't beat Michelle... who can you beat?

      The heart of the diary:

      Progressives do not need to follow the bad policies of the tea party to win. They should, however, follow the tactics—because the tactics work. Progressives must not allow the GOP to triangulate them by sectionalizing. Progressives must not allow Democrats to maintain Republican-lite stances.
      Amen brother!

      I read that as let's play hardball. (sorry, can't help that a TV show got that phrase)

      They primaried folks that were considered unprimariable. They lost a lot of elections but they won a lot too.

      And in the ones they didn't win they forced the winner to move closer to them - while in office.

      We've seen six years of reaching out to Republicans. That has to stop.

      From now on we need to roll over them - not reach out.

  •  Obama has been (18+ / 0-)

    Instrumental in strengthening the republican lite tendencies of the Dems.

    •  That is flat wrong.... (11+ / 0-)

      I thought the point of the article was to not "sectionalize", yet that is what you are doing.  Blame Obama, blame the victim.  Nice.  People like you made the same claims against Bill Clinton, and probably every Dem who served as president.

      Because they are not socialists, they are not progressive enough for you.  But guess what, the President represents the entire country, the bulk of which is centrist.  This is why neither a far right or far left candidate will be elected.

      Go ahead and vote your conscience: I'm not going to throw my vote away, the SCOTUS appointments are too important.  I'm supporting a Dem who can win middle America.

      Hillary 2016.

      •  BO, and the repub lite (4+ / 0-)

        policies, blew any chance of us getting the regular teapartiers to re-align with the dem party.

        There are two sets of teapartiers - the Koch set, a tiny, extremely wealthy, minority determined to control everything and enrich themselves at the expense of everyone else, and the regular teapartiers, who hold many of the progressive populist views that many on this site support.

        The bottom line is dem policies are popular across the population.  Unfortunately, dems like BO and other 3rd way types don't care.  They support the money, not the people.

        The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

        by dfarrah on Sun May 11, 2014 at 03:58:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Is there any chance (0+ / 0-)

        that Hillary would appoint SCOTUS justices that would hold progressive economic (or other) views? I say that there isn't.

        Voting for POTUS is more than just voting for one person; it's a whole administration. Hillary's cabinet and other appointments would come only from the upper echelons of big business and Wall Street.

         Yes, she's probably better than the alternative. But we can (and must) do A LOT better than Hillary if we want the middle class to continue to exist.

        •  I'd like to see evidence.... (0+ / 0-)

          that Hillary is in the pocket of Wall Street and would NOT appoint liberal justices.  All dems that want a chance to win must obtain support from Wall Street.  That does not mean they are evil..

          Wall Street serves a purpose, like it or not.  Bill Clinton did all right for America and he had Wall Street backing.  Demonizing an entire sector of America is easy, but not true or useful, except for firing up the left wing base.

          •  She basically said as much: (0+ / 0-)

            http://www.theatlantic.com/...

            But Clinton offered a message that the collected plutocrats found reassuring, according to accounts offered by several attendees, declaring that the banker-bashing so popular within both political parties was unproductive and indeed foolish. Striking a soothing note on the global financial crisis, she told the audience, in effect: We all got into this mess together, and we’re all going to have to work together to get out of it. What the bankers heard her to say was just what they would hope for from a prospective presidential candidate: Beating up the finance industry isn’t going to improve the economy—it needs to stop.
            HRC accepted $400k for two speeches to Goldman Sachs just a few months ago; these people didn't get so wealthy by making bad investments.

            And we aren't talking about "campaign contributions" either, this is straight-up payment for services rendered.

  •  Rick Santelli's Rant (5+ / 0-)

    You know, the one that "started" the movement?

    You'll note that his objection to policy wasn't that it helped the people that created the mortgage meltdown, namely, the over-leveraged under-regulated arms of banks and brokerage houses--but that it helped homeowners.

    Which makes him a true Republikkkkanischen all the way--anything that helps the vast majority of us has to be wrong.

    NEW SINGLE! http://johnnyangelwendell.bandcamp.com/

    by Johnny Wendell on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:15:44 PM PDT

  •  But that would mean that progressives would have (6+ / 0-)

    to fight dirty.

    And Democrats don't like that. They want to seem upright and "play by the rules".

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:17:46 PM PDT

    •  The truth is not dirty (11+ / 0-)

      There is no need to fight dirty. However, there is an enormous need for the Democrats to grow a pair (sorry for the sexism) and throw punches....lots of them over and over. Every boxer has a plan until they get hit. The Republicans are rarely hit hard by Democrats. Voters respond and show up on election day when they see their leaders actually fighting for them. One of Obama's biggest weaknesses is that he only uses those sharp elbows in private. When you fight in private and the public can't see it, it just doesn't count for much of anything. They can be beaten with the truth if we are willing to hit them over the head with it non stop until election day.

      Patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you king.... Dylan

      by bywaterbob on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:27:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Every boxer has a plan until they get hit. amen nt (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        markthshark

        Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

        by k9disc on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:34:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Good post - agreed! (9+ / 0-)

        Just to further the point a little look at the Tea/Fascist persuasion model:

        1) State an emotional truth - hook the masses
        2) Misdirect the cause to a false culprit
        3) Support with highly skewed information and lies
        4) Offer false solution

        Dems goto counter to date has been to swim round and round trying to point out the falicies in 2, 3 & 4, while skipping #1 - The Hook.  It comes off dry and unmotivating.

        Dems need to use the initial truth/emotion (#1), but follow with facts and real solutions.

        George Lakoff has a lot to say about such things...

        The only reason the 1% are rich is because the 99% agree they are.

        by GreatLakeSailor on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:36:17 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  excellent analysis (3+ / 0-)

          The only part you left out is the narrator in the commercial with the whiney, childishly mocking tone of voice. You don't even have  to speak the English language to tell which side is running the ad.

          Patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings. Steal a little and they throw you in jail. Steal a lot and they make you king.... Dylan

          by bywaterbob on Sun May 11, 2014 at 05:16:48 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  How did we win the WH in 2012 and hold on (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          barleystraw

          to the Senate in 2010 and 2012? The GOP has a majority in one house.

          New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

          by AlexDrew on Sun May 11, 2014 at 05:18:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, that's a thinker...here's my take (0+ / 0-)

            Senate 2010 - Dems lost seats but since 1/3 turnover, Dems didn't lose majority
            WH 2012 - turnout; Romney pissed off a lot of NWWP
            Senate 2012 - coattails and some real batshit R's

            R's win when NWWP don't show up to vote.
            NWWP = non-wonk working people

            The only reason the 1% are rich is because the 99% agree they are.

            by GreatLakeSailor on Sun May 11, 2014 at 08:50:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Thoughtful and persuasive diary by Egberto Willies (3+ / 0-)

          And an equally thoughtful and persuasive rebuttal by Gooserock below.

          I think GreatLakeSailor hit the nail on the head with his four-point model above describing the method used by the “Tea So-Called Party.” (Good one, Gooserock!)

          1. State an emotional truth - hook the masses
          2. Misdirect the cause to a false culprit
          3. Support with highly skewed information and lies
          4. Offer false solution
          And I agree with the idea that
          Dems need to use the initial truth/emotion (#1), but follow with facts and real solutions.
          The problem is, the “emotional truth” of the “Tea So-Called Party” is always a form of sloganeering that hits their targets where they live. You better not come for MY gun. You better not raise MY taxes. Why should I pay for some lazy moocher’s safety net?

          Progressive causes seldom hit home, here and now. We’ll never get the “Tea So-Called Party” concerned about climate change by showing them pictures of polar bears. A few thousand people left homeless because their island is now at the bottom of the Indian Ocean doesn’t hit home, here and now. They’ll get concerned when all that’s left of Chicago is a bunch of skyscrapers poking above the surface of Lake Michigan.

          I really like GreatLakeSailor’s strategy, but using that plan to engage directly with tea partiers we happen to know is probably a waste of time and effort. We won’t convert any of them. But I also believe that they’ll eventually and quietly convert themselves as the real truth - as opposed to their sloganeered "emotional truth" - gradually gets closer to home.

          I believe we need to use GreatLakeSailor’s strategy in our communications with our elected representatives, in letters to newspaper and magazine editors, in our blogs, and as we deal with the more moderate conservatives we know.

          I think the diary’s headline is correct. Yes, “The ‘tea party’ won.” They won that battle. They’ve won more battles than we have lately. But the war’s not over. And dammit, we're on the right side.

          Thomas Paine: When my country...was set on fire about my ears, it was time to stir. It was time for every man to stir.

          by Bruce Brown on Sun May 11, 2014 at 06:19:35 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Just to be clear... (0+ / 0-)

            It is not my suggestion that Progressives spend much (any) time trying to convert hardcore TeaTypes.  Rather, Progressives should use effective persuasion methods to motivate NWWP(1) to engage and vote.  It's a mine-the-gold-where-it-lays strategy.  Ain't no gold for Progressives in the TeaTypes.  But NWWP?  Lot's o'gold.

            (1)non-wonk working people

            A great example of using effective persuasion was Senator Warren's tack on SS.  Her emotional truth was, "How our Seniors fair says everything about who we are as a Nation." (or she said something like that and she expanded a little more.)  She then went on to lay out the facts about the state of SS, what to do to tweak it, etc, etc.

            Warren was not addressing hard core Right Wing TeaTypes.  She was talking to NWWP.  And it worked.  TeaTypes, Right Wing Dems and Right Wing Repubs got LOTS of calls, emails from average folks not normally engaged (NWWP).  No CCPI in budget.

            As for issues that relate to potential active supporters, how about economic justice, SS, jobs, bridges that fall down(2), no art class in the local school, just & even treatment by the courts, crazy sentencing for non-violent offenses, militarized police, etc., etc.  LOTS of Progressive material that lands in the sphere of NWWP.

            (2)Hwy45 and Bluemound Road, Milwaukee, WI: car hits falling concrete on Hwy45 yesterday.  Could have easily killed everyone in the car.  Shit's fallin' apart around us, and everyone knows it.

            The only reason the 1% are rich is because the 99% agree they are.

            by GreatLakeSailor on Sun May 11, 2014 at 08:25:16 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  "You (average citizen) are being RIPPED OFF... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            GreatLakeSailor
            State an emotional truth - hook the masses
            by the politically- & economically-well-connected. They, and their corporate media cronies, distract you from realizing it by pushing your hot-buttons like abortion, gays, immigrants, Benghazi(!), and deficits."

            My attempt to start a messaging conversation.

            "Push the button, Max!" Jack Lemmon as Professor Fate, The Great Race

            by bartcopfan on Mon May 12, 2014 at 08:03:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  What you state is accurate... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bartcopfan

              Your target audience will tune out if you state the obvious (that they are being had) too bluntly.  Humans use denial as a defense mechanism to protect their ego/pride/emotions.

              Example:
              Dude, this used car you just bought is a piece of shit.  You totally got ripped off.
              No I didn't!!!!! I, I, I knew the engine & transmission were worn out!!!!!  The guy that sold it to me said the nice paint was only on 6660 of these models and it's special...

              Instead, maybe state this emotional (and very obvious) truth:

              When I was a kid, my parents had the time, almost every weekend, to take us fishing or hiking, camping, on a picnic and swimming, to a museum or the botanical gardens.

              Ask young parents today, perhaps your cousins, coworkers, friends, neighbors, the cashier at the Walmart: When was the last time you spent two days in a row with your kids doing stuff that accomplished nothing more than the pure joy of growing up?  Are you able to do that week after week?  That's a damn reasonable expectation from the American Social Contract - what happened?

              The Hoarders ain't just stealing my prosperity - they're stealing my kids childhood and that ain't refundable.

              Toss in some solid facts that everyone will easily recognize as true, then move to Progressive Economic Justice issues - like a living wage - and make the pitch.

              Needs a little polish...

              The only reason the 1% are rich is because the 99% agree they are.

              by GreatLakeSailor on Mon May 12, 2014 at 09:48:25 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  "Give 'em Hell, Harry [S Truman]!" (0+ / 0-)

        "I'll just tell the Truth and they'll think it's Hell!"

        "Push the button, Max!" Jack Lemmon as Professor Fate, The Great Race

        by bartcopfan on Mon May 12, 2014 at 07:54:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  We can fight back without fighting dirty. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Yonit, METAL TREK

      We just have to learn how to fight back.  Our pols have been bullied for too long.  Call the GOPers out on it, for starters.  They'll back right off.  But do something!

      The GOP will destroy anything they can't own.

      by AnnieR on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:35:27 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  You nailed it in this post, Egberto (17+ / 0-)

    The Tea Party delivered for the Koch Brothers & Oligarchs.

    “Industry does everything they can and gets away with it almost all the time, whether it’s the coal industry, not the subject of this hearing, or water or whatever. They will cut corners, and they will get away with it. " Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D, WVa

    by FishOutofWater on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:21:01 PM PDT

  •  I Disagree That Progressives Can Learn Anything. (27+ / 0-)

    Because it's clearly not voters or voter-activist groups that are any driving force whatsoever in the Tea So-Called Party.

    As the background pieces show, the phenomenon is the fabrication of billionaires, going back well before anyone heard of Barack Obama (even I knew it predated his likely run for President). When the billionaires decide to stage an event, there's an event with thousands bused in at no cost from across the country. But when the "members" decide to, there's 11 white geezers with misspelled signs, kicking at some crabgrass.

    This is one reason the Tea So-Called Party has been so often and easily co-opted by evangelicals. Unlike libertarians and puritanical aging pre-boomers, evangelicals are a purpose-built organizing and mobilization force, they have the infrastructure, history and habits of getting numbers of people to do things. And they outnumber libertarians about a thousand to one.

    Progressives have never had an institution analogous to evangelicalism that exists in the real world to convert masses of ordinary people to become supporters and working allies. Unions are the closest we ever came but they're limited to workplace membership, and as we all know their numbers are down 1/2 to 2/3 from their peak strength.

    Most important, progressives have no billionaires. Soros or Turner, I'm sorry, donating and supporting liberal causes does not equate with fighting to make the US an authoritarian oligarchy, which dozens of billionaires here and around the world are doing. Fighting meaning spending serious money and backing not conservative ideas but all sorts of takeover operations across all sectors of society.

    We evidently have one billionaire willing to fight climate change on the liberal side, but there isn't one on earth willing to fight to make the US a liberal society.

    So lacking both of the two key assets which make the Tea So-Called Party a genuine force in American politics, progressives have nothing to learn from them.

    Progressives are in the position of 3rd world democracy and liberation forces of the present era abroad, or from the past here at home. We have more to learn from the likes of a Mandela, maybe Susan B. Anthony or A. Philip Randolph, people who labored for hears to help build movement with no strong expectation of accomplishing the level of change needed in a medium term time frame.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:27:34 PM PDT

    •  Very well said. (8+ / 0-)

      We have nothing to learn from the Tea Party except what not to do.

      But what we do have is the vote, which is why the GOP does all it can to stop poor and minorities from voting and they gerrymander to the max.

      Funny thing happened on the way the the polls: people looked in their pocket and found something. A healthcare card, a few bucks from some extra work, a pay raise, many things.

      The way to win is to point and laugh at the utter failure of the Republicans to A. help the massive number of poverty Americans improve their lot, and B. they didn't stop the economy from improving, either, total fail! So we do have something to brag about.

      A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

      by onionjim on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:18:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What not to do? (0+ / 0-)

        They only got some 35 members of their party elected to Congress on a first try.

        They've got their members elected to state leges and school boards all over the place.  What are non-3rd way dems doing?  Losing elections or hanging on for dear life.

        Have progressives ever remotely matched anything like that?  No.

        The tp-ers have been an effective opposition party.  Can the progressives, much less the entire dem party, make such a claim? No.

        The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

        by dfarrah on Sun May 11, 2014 at 04:04:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Of course not (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          duhban, AlexDrew, METAL TREK, onionjim

          because "progressives" continually bash Democrats for not delivering the impossible, immediately.  All that ever has done or will do, is elect Republicans.

          "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

          by Whimsical on Sun May 11, 2014 at 04:45:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  delivering unilateral cuts to SS to the elderly (0+ / 0-)

            delivering political and legal obstacles to prosecuting war criminals

            delivering bailout billions to wall street ponzi schemers

            delivering destroyed lives and condemnation to whistle-blowers

          •  Yawn. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            milkbone

            Another day, another hippie puncher.

            I'll take Egberto, from the diary:

            Progressives do not need to follow the bad policies of the tea party to win. They should, however, follow the tactics—because the tactics work. Progressives must not allow the GOP to triangulate them by sectionalizing. Progressives must not allow Democrats to maintain Republican-lite stances.
            But thanks for the sectionalizing.  Maybe it's you who's working for the GOTP?  

            Good day.

            "A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence agst. foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home." - James Madison

            by gharlane on Sun May 11, 2014 at 11:42:44 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  try earning my vote (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Crimson Buddha, gharlane

              don't just expect it to be in the bag

              •  Try having reasonable expectations (0+ / 0-)

                and politicians will try to earn your vote.

                "Progressives" have made it very clear that if they dont get the impossible immediately, not only will Democrats not get their vote, "progressives" will try to discourage others from voting for them.

                This is why they get ignored- because they demand things no one could deliver.  So, people who know whats politically possible figure "progressives" are a lost cause and try to earn the votes of reasonable people instead.

                "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

                by Whimsical on Mon May 12, 2014 at 04:00:43 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The Democratic Party platform (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  barleystraw

                  and the New Deal regulations, let alone policies and practices that always poll in the majority are unreasonable expectations to have of Democratic Party politicians? Good to know . . .

                  "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

                  by bryduck on Mon May 12, 2014 at 12:59:14 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Implementing them completely and (0+ / 0-)

                    immediately reweaving the New Deal regulations the right has spent forty years chipping away at ? Damn right that's unreasonable.

                    As for polls- polls are meaningless; except for the one on election day.  I don't give a damn how high something polls - if people who oppose it win elections then that sends the message that the what the American people actually want and what they tell pollsters they want are two different things.

                    "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

                    by Whimsical on Mon May 12, 2014 at 06:51:41 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  If only. (0+ / 0-)

                      None of your "purists" or scare-quoted "progressives" are advocating anything close to that.

                      Try reconstructing your argument, this time without the straw figurines.  Thanks and good day.

                      "A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence agst. foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home." - James Madison

                      by gharlane on Wed May 14, 2014 at 09:05:44 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Lol (0+ / 0-)

                        Classic "progressive" tactics-

                        cant actually rebut my argument so accuse me of throwing straw men.

                        That's EXACTLY what the "progressives want"- the impossible immediately.  See unlike what "progressives" did to Obama- I actually pay attention to what they say.

                        And until you moderate your expectations accordingly you are going to keep being ignored, and rightfully so.

                        "The future of man is not one billion of us fighting over limited resources on a soon-to-be dead planet. . .I won't go back into the cave for anyone."

                        by Whimsical on Fri May 16, 2014 at 09:47:57 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

    •  I live in the South. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chi, bartcopfan

      We have black churches.  I think that's an untapped resource, along with unions.

      The GOP will destroy anything they can't own.

      by AnnieR on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:37:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Don't forget the corporate media. Whose customers (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, gharlane, bartcopfan

      are the billionaires, and the billionaire's battalions of fake people.

      The very same corporate media the Democrats and the Left expect to give them a fair shake to disseminate information. We go as far as to give billions to them every few years for the privilege of getting our words twisted and our asses handed to us in terms of coverage.

      This diary kind of pisses me off. We all know they were a corporate front, knew that from the beginning - a corporate front group focused on sabotaging America.

      And we let them do it without so much as calling them what they were and calling out what they were doing.

      Did anybody call them corporate tools of sabotage? The Sabotage Party? 4 years later and the Koch Bros got some press and some political angst, and even that is weak tea given their life's work of sabotaging American government for their personal profit.

      Inexcusable political failure. So much so that someone has to ask if the fix was in.

      Now there is pretty much unlimited funding of political propaganda from outside interests turning our elections into political markets. And we're going to have to compete - busking for money from people who can't afford it to give it to corporate loudspeakers so they can deliver all the news that serves profit.

      This Tea Party corporate front is the new political normal.

      meh.

      Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

      by k9disc on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:44:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  imma expert in preparing slides for the (3+ / 0-)

    microscope, and in ensuring the surgical blades are so so sharp they'll split the layers of your turfy-nonsense like buttah, honey.

    i know enough by now how to stay in the saddle, even if i'm riding it on the SIDE of my pony. while wearing as little as possible (for distraction) and remembering to forget to bathe (for security). if i'm not having fun, work's not getting done. RAW !!

    TRAILHEAD of accountability for Bush-2 Crimes? -- Addington's Perpwalk.

    by greenbird on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:29:15 PM PDT

  •  Not quite that simple .... (10+ / 0-)

    It's not that simple, I think the end goal was a Shock Doctrine strategy to eliminate SS and Medicare. The Shock Doctrine documents the tactic used many times in other countries:
    - shock the system by a big financial crash or crisis
    - claim that since we're in "unique" crisis times, drastic cuts need to be made to social services
    - implement said drastic cuts

    Bush accomplished the first, the worst financial crash in 80 years. And the Tea Party/GOP dutifully did their part and pushed for the second.

    But this is where they failed. McCain picked a bozo as a running mate, and America elected a progressive black President, instead of running scared from the "crisis". So the Tea Party/GOP tried shocking the system again, by shutting down the government and downgrading our credit rating.

    But that didn't work either, so they went for the lesser shock of the sequester cuts. It had a small effect, and helped to keep the economy down. Despite all this, the economy slowly rebounded, and drastic cuts to SS and Medicare weren't made. Instead, Obamacare was passed and stuck.

    At this point, the Republicans and the Tea Party split. The Republicans, mostly driven by corporate interests, are tired of the economy being jammed, and don't want any more shutdowns, downgrades, or shocks to the economic system. The Tea Party however, still dreams of the Shock Doctrine strategy, and still wants to shut down the government and eliminate SS and Medicare, and now Obamacare as well.

    Funded by the Koch's and other extremists, the Tea Party nevertheless has lost their Shock Doctrine strategy. They have lost much of their political clout, and are being actively engaged by big money interests in the Republican Party, like the Chamber of Commerce. In the long run, the Tea Party will be relegated to the extremes, like the Koch-funded John Birch Society.

    So yes, the Tea Party did lose.

    •  It's called starve the beast. Wither it down to (5+ / 0-)

      a size where you can drown it in a bathtub.

      And it's been the Republican's expressly stated goal for my entire political life. Damn near 100% of Republicans is on board, publicly with signatures to key documents, with the sabotage of America to defund Medicare and Social Security.

      The Tea Party was just a tool to that end.

      I do believe the Shock Doctrine was in effect, meaning that the astute political operator throws "whatever they have lying around, wink wink" at the problem.

      Too bad we didn't have our own positive proposals lying around and we didn't have a history of calling out the Republicans for sabotaging our government.

      "Government sucks and I'll prove it!" Should not be allowed to be a winning campaign slogan.

      They should get clobbered on this, but there are crickets.

      Democracy - 1 person 1 vote. Free Markets - More dollars more power.

      by k9disc on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:49:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't think the rank and file tea partiers (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dfarrah, gharlane

      were at all in favor of cutting social security and medicare.  

      I recall that it was the establishment wings of both dems and repubs who at least put social security "on the table".

  •  like all lite beers and teas they should return to (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paragryne

    the camels from whence they trickled  

    Progressives do not need to follow the bad policies of the tea party to win. They should, however, follow the tactics—because the tactics work. Progressives must not allow the GOP to triangulate them by sectionalizing. Progressives must not allow Democrats to maintain Republican-lite stances.

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:35:58 PM PDT

  •  Loved this...Best piece I've ever read that tells. (5+ / 0-)

    This is simply the best fucking piece EVER that tells what the Tea Party was really all about. I love for once to read that people get what really happened instead of what the media reported, which was basically a damn press release released by the Tea Party.

    Whoever wrote this is brilliant.

  •  #ReoccupyWallStreet eom (4+ / 0-)

    I live under the bridge to the 21st Century.

    by Crashing Vor on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:38:36 PM PDT

  •  A revolution made for billionaires... (6+ / 0-)

    I live under the bridge to the 21st Century.

    by Crashing Vor on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:40:10 PM PDT

  •  It's not enough to make the Democrats we have now (8+ / 0-)

    more progressive, although that is important.  But it's more important to expand the reach of progressivism.

    So long as there are enough seats in Congress held by centrists and conservatives to prevent progressive legislation from passing, stalemate will continue.  We already have stalemate, and as we know stalemate leads only to further disillusionment.

    What needs to happen then is, first, for liberals to replace centrist Democrats and win their general elections.  But even that won't be enough so long as there remains a big enough minority of conservatives so fanatically committed to preventing any progress from happening.  So the next step is for liberals to start winning in conservative districts.

    When liberals, or at least economic liberals, start winning in places like Texas or Arkansas again, then you'll not only start getting the majorities needed to override the obstructionists, you'll also start seeing the national political climate shift.  Merely having the same 200-250 House Democrats and 45-58 Senate Democrats we've generally had in the last 20 years or do become more liberal won't mean much if big reforms and programs still can't get passed or get passed only after an ugly, protracted, and acrimonious fight that turns off many Americans to everyone involved.  What you need is to have liberal majorities large enough to truly marginalize and overwhelm the opposition, and to make passing reform legislation look like the overwhelming consensus.  That is how the New Deal and Great Society got passed.

    We are a long ways off from that goal.  Right now liberals can't even win Democratic primaries in suburban Chicago - look at how Ilya Sheyman's campaign turned out in 2012 when he lost badly to centrist Dem Brad Schneider.  If we can't even win in those districts, winning in conservative districts is still a pipe dream.

    So first let's start organizing and winning those centrist districts.  And let's start organizing in those conservative districts, winning the primaries there as well, and eventually we need to show we can win and gain a foothold in red territory.  Because believe me, when you see an unapologetic economic liberal Warren or Sanders win in a place like suburban Chicago, and then in a place like West Virginia, then you will see the political winds truly shift.  

    "Those who have wrought great changes in the world never succeeded by gaining over chiefs; but always by exciting the multitude." - Martin Van Buren

    by puakev on Sun May 11, 2014 at 01:47:40 PM PDT

  •  "President Obama has accomplished a lot"? (10+ / 0-)

    Boy, you've got me on that one.
    Nearly everyone I talk to seems to be of a different opinion.
    And nearly all of those folks voted for Obama.

    There are many of us who are tired of the cheerleading.

    PS - The Dow did hit a new record this week.

  •  "Poignant" doesn't mean "stark" or "obvious" (0+ / 0-)

    It means "provoking keen regret or sadness."

    And you meant "populist values" not "populous values."

    The ideas here are so good that the prose ought to be perfect. :)

  •  Tea party is just on payroll of plutocrats. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Agree about the function of the tea party. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    White Buffalo, blue earth

    Disagree about Obama somehow being the enemy of plutocracy.  As Obama said himself, he's the one keeping the people with the pitchforks from getting justice.

    The purpose of the Democrats (as they currently exist) is to water down the demands of the public and to make whatever course corrections are needed to ensure plutocracy survives (even if that temporarily goes against the interests of a few individual plutocrats).

    •  Cheating for the plutocracy (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Yonit

      The theocrats and the plutocrats see anyone who opposes the idea that they always win as an enemy.  It's like any cheat for us group.  A classic cheat for us partisan group.   So they absolute HATE anyone who tries to treat all equally:  then their group cannot cheat.

      Hitler's groups was basically the ultimate cheat for us group.  A lots been written on similarities between the RW party of today's America and the Nazi party.  Like Hitler, they use theocracy and plutocracy both; Hitler also convinced a lot of the unions and other trade groups to support him.  

      Anyway, when Hitler's thugs carried out the Night of the Long Knives when around 1100 or more Non-Nazi party members were killed--along with people who might challenge Hitler within the Nazi party, like the leaders of the Brown Shirts whose thuggery helped bring Hitler into power.

      Thankfully, we're not at the point of the RW doing wholesale murdering yet, but that party is heading in that direction.  Thus, I think, their constant slanders that those who want everyone treated equally and don't want people using superstition to run our country as vile nazis.

      They perceive Obama as an enemy because he won't let them cheat.  At least on his general principals.  And they HATE him for being an advocate of the rule of law.    

      That, by the way, is their acid test for Judges and Justices:     they want partisan liars who will cheat for their friends, namely theocrats and plutocrats.  They have been gutting more and more laws, leaving them on the books solely to enforce against their victims and those they perceive as their enemies.

       

      “Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects.” ― Will Rogers (Of course this also applies to me.)

      by MugWumpBlues on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:51:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I certainly don't feel that way (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dfarrah, TJ, RabbleON, stringer bell
        They perceive Obama as an enemy because he won't let them cheat.  At least on his general principals.  And they HATE him for being an advocate of the rule of law.    
        I'll believe that the day I see fraudulent banksters being prosecuted and Obama rolling back the surveillance state.

        Until then, imho, we have a lawless state and a two-tiered justice system.

    •  Exactly (5+ / 0-)

      The only time the Democratic establishment is interested in progressives is when they need their votes. After the polls close the lip service dies, progressives are denied a seat at the table and get kicked to the curb.

      Plutocrats drive the train via campaign contributions. The shortest path to breaking the backs of the plutocrats within the Democratic establishment is to sever the link between them and their campaign contributions.  

  •  I'm Fed Up with the Tea Party's Ignorance... (5+ / 0-)

    about basic economics. The stimulus was successful. The evidence is all around us including more than 50 straight months of positive job growth. Note to everyone; all 8+ million lost jobs have been replaced as of now making this the longest job market recovery on record. Job market recoveries have nothing to do with comparative unemployment rates; all they measure is the time it takes from the start of the recession to replace all the jobs lost during the recession and after the official output recovery begins. Changes in the  unemployment rate can depend on many things such as the rate of growth of the work force and changes in the labor force participation rate. One of the reasons that Obama's job market recovery took so long was that the stimulus actually encouraged millions of people, long dropped from the unemployment statistics, to come out of the shadows and return to the job market. I agree that six and a half years is a long time to wait for a job market recovery. Thanks obstructionist tea party!!

  •  rebranding the GOP Bircher wing: Old Whine (12+ / 0-)

    in even older teapots

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be" - Barack Obama 04/27/2013 (@eState4Column5).

    by annieli on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:19:18 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for this! Yeah I made this argument about (5+ / 0-)

    Tills being the real Tea Party candidate this whole time. In fact, polls showed he had to move more to the right in order to win. Plus Greg Brannon was a loser candidate from the beginning. He was a joke candidate who faced legal troubles and was a 9/11 truther. He was never meant to win, he was meant to make guys like Tillis move even further to the right. Tillis is the face of Art Pope, ALEC and the Koch Brother's agenda and NC voters hate the GOP legislator. Polls showed that Tillis is the one GOP frontrunner Kay Hagan is ahead of in the polls. Brannon and Mark Harris lead Hagan and proved to be competitive because they're not part of the NC legislature. Now I am looking forward to the Georgia GOP primary because that's a real shot show where a runoff is inevitable.

    Funny Stuff at http://www.funnyordie.com/oresmas

    by poopdogcomedy on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:20:28 PM PDT

  •  The tea party "won".... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    judyms9, a2nite, FiredUpInCA, Yonit

    ...because the established Republican party has no leadership or any ideas. It was an easy take-over. It is what happens with a lack of leadership/ideas--anyone can come in and do what they want.

    •  I agree. The Tea Party is a gimmick. The Flying (0+ / 0-)

      Walindas circus act would have served the same purpose, a distraction, Sherpas carrying the current load of the party--Bush/Cheney's ruinous legacy--while the plutocrats climbed ever upward economically.  But it made them feel temporarily important, so what the hell, except that they have calcified their party into a brittle monolithic ramrod that will be used to keep the nation divided in ways that average citizens will pay the price for.  They are Rosemary's Baby.

      Building a better America with activism, cooperation, ingenuity and snacks.

      by judyms9 on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:42:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I always thought the three biggest reasons (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Whimsical, Yonit

    the Tea Party moved the Republicans were:

    1. They believed they could move the party, even when the money was against them.
    2. They never actually left the Republican party.
    3. They voted all the time.

    Failing to do these three things are some of the major contributors to progressives failure to keep moving the Democrats left.  Too many people give up because they don't think they can control the party.  Ultimately, though, controlling the party is done by voting, because, right now, voting is still the method of determining elections, and right now, there are two parties that determine most of what goes on in the US.

    I know people will cry "but we voted".  And you may have.  But if the core always votes, then the core will never have control the way the Tea Party does, and "the core" needs to increase, not declare, as I've seen people do, that they are going to go to other parties.  That's a useless gesture in this country.  It will just cause the Democratic party to move where the reliable votes are.

    "Moon landing was real. Evolution exists. Tax cuts lose revenue. The research has shown this a thousand times. Enough already." - Austan Goolsbee

    by anonevent on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:32:31 PM PDT

  •  Ok. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    White Buffalo

    Where do we start and how to we accomplish this?  Force, or at least threaten to force, primaries from the left?  Do we have the candidates to do that?  I would like nothing more than to clear out my Democratic party and insist that it's politicians stick to our platform.  I hate seeing those who are beholden to the monied interests.  They're not much better than republicans.  Worse in some aspects.

    The GOP will destroy anything they can't own.

    by AnnieR on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:33:08 PM PDT

    •  Where do we start? Good question. Try this: (6+ / 0-)

      Figure out how to fundamentally change the current attitude of democratic campaigns from "We need more and more money to beat the Koch onslaught" to actually getting the message out there that the republican party has played this country for a big bunch of fools for over 30 years. Stop whining about friggin' money and start talking, arguing, fighting back and legislatively hold the neocon's feet to the fire, making it as publicly embarrassing and obvious as possible at every chance. Save for Alan Grayson, Bernie Sanders and Liz Warren, not one damned so-called Democratic politician has spent any meaningful time cutting into the neocons and publicly demonstrating what they are and what they're doing. It's pathetic.

      You make a great point about ensuring that the reps stick to the platform and stop trying to appease their corporate masters while appearing to support what the media calls "populist" ideas. Where it gets complicated this that in the media, the word "populist" is synonymous with "liberal" and "socialist"... all of which have negative connotations successfully branded so by their neocon masters; for example, no distinction is ever made either in broadcast media or public schools between "democratic socialism" (where we need to be and what will make this country great again) and "Bolshevik socialism" (as in Lenin & Stalin - like government control). Ignorance is the fastest way to win a seat of power in this country.... so in tandem with that thought:

      The main problem with most voters who claim to be democratic supporters is that they consider politics to be a very badly produced reality teevee program that requires no audience participation other than to pick up the remote every two or four years and select the desired channel. In that respect the neocons have Dems out-flanked... they're angry enough to be active and stay active. Conversely, Dems just don't seem to currently have any real sense of urgency about much of anything, let alone politics or the country's future - but mention marijuana legalization or closing abortion clinics and they might sit up for a few moments and listen to the news until their attention span drifts away onto something else.

      The neocons know this - they feed off of it - and they've used it every time to win elections since 1972.

      "More money" won't fix this. Bold, aggressive, no-nonsense leadership and communication will. Publicly skewering neocons with cold, hard facts at every turn will. Raising hell with turncoats and vultures like blue-dog demos and Third Way Wall Street infiltrators will.

      In short - the dems don't need "more money"... they need more GUTS.

      •  Excellent comment. (0+ / 0-)

        May I suggest you send it to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, as well as any Democrats that represent you.  

        The GOP will destroy anything they can't own.

        by AnnieR on Sun May 11, 2014 at 04:50:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  It has been almost 35 years (0+ / 0-)

        Longer than a generation, and the Republicans are still trying to make us believe that trickle-down economics works, even in the face of decades of failure. Why are Democrats still trying to tinker around the edges of this failed idea instead of calling it what it is?

        Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað

        by milkbone on Mon May 12, 2014 at 01:04:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Too many got "purchased" in the process (0+ / 0-)

          by the same corporate greedheads. There are may excellent technical discussions on this site about this issue approaching it from nearly every angle, but if you wanted a simple answer distilled from the myriad of academic analyses, it boils down to one simple fact: money damned near always trumps humanity. That's why Marxist/Bolshevik Communism, Libertarianism and Fascism never work, no matter how hard some one tries to force-feed it into a country: they all look like beautiful plans until you factor in human nature, and then the whole mess falls apart. Which is why we have governments, laws and processes to enforce those laws, most all of which are being made mockery by the current crop of fools running this country into the ground - from the occupants of the Supreme Court to the Joint Chiefs to the occupant of the big house on Pennsylvania Avenue. They SAY they know and want to represent "da Peeple", but what they really represent comes in denominations of 1s, 5s, 10s ,50s and 100s. And the oligarchs stand in line, drooling at the mouth, ready to hand out cases of them  to anyone who'll do their bidding, just like they used to hand out cigarettes to teenagers on the streets in big cities. Works every damned time.

          How to get rid of it? It isn't impossible, but it will be very difficult without someone or a group of progressive-thinking, extremely aggressive people without any direct party affiliation to somehow get in, clean house, blow the doors off the FCC and reestablish the Fairness Doctrine so that some facts can have a chance to be aired for all to see. Then, the High Courts need to be completely purged of all this right wing activist garbage that's been appointed over the last 30 years and use absolute neutrality as the only true test of any judicial candidate - none of this Gays, Guns and God Abortion bullshit.

          If that can all be done within 5 or so years, this country might - MIGHT - have a snowball's chance of re-gaining a small portion of what it used to be and start to move forward again. BTW, This country never was about religion, no matter what these idiots preach: Every explorer that hit these shores was looking for only one of two things: massive quantities of gold or a faster passage to the Far East to establish trade. In short: IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN ABOUT MONEY - and they've always used "God" as an excuse to make themselves feel better about butchering anyone and everything that got in their way. What Columbus did to Hispanola wasn't much different than what 8 presidents  did to the American Indian or the Hawaiian Island people - they were barbarians in pursuit of treasure and power. What was done to those so long ago is now being done to the Middle Class - only the weapons have changed. As Neil Young once wrote: "You've got a kinder, gentler machine gun hand".

          If it takes much longer than 5 years, the death spiral will only speed up.

  •  Excellent stuff, I had never heard of Powell (0+ / 0-)

    thanks a bunch

  •  what a load of garbage (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blue earth, dfarrah, spacemanspiff23

    Those corporate Democrats you loathe so much agree with you on almost every issue. But you people seem hell-bent on ensuring big Democratic losses in 2014 and 2016. Grow up, for Christ sake.

  •  Populist Black President ? (5+ / 0-)

    Our "Populist Black President" gave Timothy Geithner
    and Lawrence Summers their own office inside the
    White House.

    I Guess having Wall Street on Speed-Dial was too much Trouble.

    Wait until Net Neutrality is a Vague Memory and then
    try and Remember WHO it was that gave that Job to the
    current head of the FCC.

    "Populist Black President" - My Ass.

    On Giving Advice: Smart People Don't Need It and Stupid People Don't Listen

    by Brian76239 on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:41:20 PM PDT

    •  You have any idea how angry it makes me (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue earth, DeadHead

      to find myself agreeing with this?

      And the three people capable of doing the things in that office necessary to get this country back on a forward track don't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever getting there right now. Why? Because they might hurt somebody's widdle biddy feewings by calling the rest of them out for what they are: seditionist traitors who value money over people.

  •  Is that a "blah" (0+ / 0-)

    person in the right lower corner???

    Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. Frank Zappa

    by Da Rock on Sun May 11, 2014 at 02:54:16 PM PDT

  •  Tea Party influence (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Whimsical

    I'm an Obama supporter, but had the GOP picked Jon Huntsman as their candidate, and allowed him to run on his real beliefs, he would now be the President, probably in the biggest landslide ever. The tea party has forced the GOP to not be able to nominate anyone who makes sense.

  •  I'll Go Along With Everything Except This (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    dfarrah
    The tea party was an orchestration of events and people to ensure that the plutocracy was not destroyed by a charismatic president who was elected before the country was ready for him.
    Nope, not by a long shot and I can only wish it was something that simple.

    But no it wasn't. I've been fighting the lie of conservatism as it is preached and practiced in this nation for close to 35 years now. And what they are really doing and have been doing since 2008 is just what the conservative/Republican/Tea Party has always been doing.

    It starts like this. Every time the conservative/Republican/Tea Party (because as this diary accurately points out the
    Tea party is nothing more than a handy and well funded invention that has always existed) they allow a segment or even segments of our economy to be looted and collapsed by their 1% friends. And once it is collapsed they run to the government to get bailed out. And after they are bailed out nothing really changes and they just move on to the next opportunity.

    Except this time is was the entire financial sector they looted and collapsed to the tune of about $18 trillion and of course that kicked off another great depression. Only disguised as a recession.

    But that was still big enough that the lie of conservatism should have been once and for all exposed for what it is. Nothing more than a pack of carefully orchestrated lies. And consequently the conservative/Republicans should have been dead forever more.

    And that is where the Tea Party came in. Not to oppose our first black president. It would not have mattered who was president. If Hillary Clinton would have won we would have spent the past six years discussing gender discrimination and contempt.

    It would not have mattered. And the only thing that did was covering the failure of conservatism and the lie of how it is preached and practiced in this nation.

    And the conservative/Republican/Tea party should have never been allowed to get away with that and confuse their failure but they did. By nothing else except making more noise about it than we did.

    So now we progressive/liberal/Democrats find ourselves in the almost helpless and hopeless situation we could imagine where we only have one single tiny advantage in our favor. And that is just this minor point of happening to be in the majority on almost every level.

    Where if we could actually turn out the majority of our voters we would win just like we always do. But I guess that's just too hard for us. So instead as usual we will just wear ourselves out bitching about it and get steamrolled again.

    Collect Different Days

    by Homers24 on Sun May 11, 2014 at 03:29:14 PM PDT

  •  Really? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cybrestrike

    This is not all directed straight at our front-pager here, but is more about the general mindset which seems to be becoming prevalent on the Front Page in general.

    The tea party accomplished its mission within the Republican Party, ensuring that the the chosen party not only stuck by tea party values, but reinforced them.
     
    If you couldn't read between the lines at all, you'd swear that was telling you that somehow, the Tea Party is honorable enough to be praised because anything it did, it did legitimately and above board, and with honest intentions within the Republican Party. Since when do we accept that concept? The Tea Party is a sham movement, invented and backed by millionaires, to divide the GOP and the general population.  They accomplished NOTHING without subverting process all over the place, using their filthy money and lots of propaganda, helpfully provided by every large major media outlet in this country.
    Unfortunately, a few Democrats are also wards of the plutocracy.
    Unfortunately! Oh, how unfortunate that 7 of them voted to support Darryl Issa and his Benghazi Bastardization! Did I hear you say "No punishment"? No repercussion for fucking the party over in favor of Teh Crazy?

    No? Of course I didn't! All I ever see are these pitiful little treatises and concern scoldings all over this place about how Blue Dog Districts are Conservative and Therefore You Must Run Conservative Democrats in a Conservative District.

    What nonsense. Not everyone in a "conservative district" is a "conservative". Having to run a "conservative Democrat" to "win" a "conservative district" is a charming little con, IMO, and it's time to stop buying into it.

    Progressives must not allow Democrats to maintain Republican-lite stances.
    Unlike the "Tea Party Followers", real progressives know bullshit when they see and hear it. There was nothing legitimate about what "The Tea Party" wrought on this electorate, and I find the idea that we'd seem to advocate otherwise while we're again mis-appropriating the word "progressive" to be patently dishonest.

    "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

    by lunachickie on Sun May 11, 2014 at 03:37:05 PM PDT

    •  The tea party (0+ / 0-)

      is not a 'sham' movement.  Just because the Kochs are involved doesn't mean the party didn't have regular people involved.

      Unfortunately, the Kochs took advantage of people's anger over the economy, the Wall Street bailout, and other issues while BO and the dems dithered.

      The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

      by dfarrah on Sun May 11, 2014 at 04:27:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Regular people (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cybrestrike

        only got involved once the sham was set up.

        It was a sham movement, fully bankrolled by those who would subvert government. Anyone who is paying attention understands that. Apparently you weren't.

        Unfortunately, the Kochs took advantage of people's anger
        LOL! Yeah, good luck selling this, along with the continuing mis-appropriation of the label of "progressive".

        "Inevitability" diminishes free will and replaces it with self-fulfilling prophecies."--Geenius At Wrok

        by lunachickie on Sun May 11, 2014 at 04:44:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  those 'leaving' the democratic party (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    raptavio

    are at best shortsightedly naively selfish.

    For almost 50 years those types have argued that if they just don't vote then things will change. That was silly then and remains so.

    Der Weg ist das Ziel

    by duhban on Sun May 11, 2014 at 03:40:42 PM PDT

  •  This is part of the reason why (0+ / 0-)

    dems keep losing - or can't win.  We've convince ourselves of the following instead of reaching out to a potential constituency:  The tea party was an orchestration of events and people to ensure that the plutocracy was not destroyed by a charismatic president who was elected before the country was ready for him.

    As if BO would ever be part of an effort to destroy plutocracy, or to even blunt its power.  That notion is beyond laughable.

    We refuse see or hear the regular teapartiers.   We refuse to face up to what our party does or doesn't do.  

    The teapartiers object to the capitulation to Wall Street; they object to the spying; they think corporations have way too much power; they think unemployment should be the focus of legislative efforts.

    Many of their notions are very similar to liberal populist notions.

    Do you honestly believe that the regular members of the teaparty give a hoot about ensuring that the "plutocracy was not destroyed?"  They think BO is part of the plutocracy, just like a number of progressives do.  

    The banks have a stranglehold on the political process. Mike Whitney

    by dfarrah on Sun May 11, 2014 at 03:44:55 PM PDT

    •  We have have won 4 of the last 6 prez elections. (0+ / 0-)

      New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

      by AlexDrew on Sun May 11, 2014 at 05:28:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then why have the non-rich (0+ / 0-)

        been screwed over the whole time and longer than that? Oh, right, because you can also say that "we won only 5 of the last 12 Presidential elections" or "only 4 of the last 9" . . .

        "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

        by bryduck on Mon May 12, 2014 at 01:07:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  What is your point? My point is that both parties (0+ / 0-)

          have had steered the wheel. We are not blameless. If you read the Dkos front page and rec list, you would think the GOP has controlled the Prez, House and Senate unfettered since 1980.

          New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

          by AlexDrew on Mon May 12, 2014 at 01:44:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I thought your comment (0+ / 0-)

            was directed at this line:

            This is part of the reason why dems keep losing - or can't win
            I apologize for not knowing which part of the previous comment you were responding to.

            "Lone catch of the moon, the roots of the sigh of an idea there will be the outcome may be why?"--from a spam diary entitled "The Vast World."

            by bryduck on Mon May 12, 2014 at 02:39:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I voted for Obama twice (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    barleystraw

    But I am not automatically voting for Democrats any more.  The ONLY achievement of Obama's presidency is the ACA, and that followed a sellout by Obama and Rahm.  I really can't express how disgusted I am.  It's as if FDR came to the White House, then did jack shit for 8 years.  The Democratic party pros got what they wanted--they have crippled progressives in this country, probably for good.

  •  People around here need to wake up (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Urban Space Cowboy

    First, ACA is not the only achievement of the Obama president, not by a long shot.  Second, even if it was, it would still be a big deal.  Third, where the Obama administration falls down most deeply, on financial service regulation, individual freedoms, and transparency, there is a bipartisan rot of secrecy and insider power brokering that will not be addressed unless and until at least one of the political parties is forced into greater enlightenment, and on current form, the Republicans are a lifetime away while the Dems even now can be manipulated in a healthy direction off and on, and with greater progressive involvement, could significantly improve.

    Furthermore, with how deeply institutionalized the two parties are in the US, reform of policy and politics to a considerable extent needs to take place through them.  A prerequisite to rooting John Birchism and proto-fascism out of the Republican Party is fixing the Democrats to the point where the Republicans get fed up with losing, not picking up your toys and leaving, which would simply allow the corporate oligarchy to further entrench itself.  The Democrats have come a long way since the pre-Howard Dean days when no-one would even talk about comprehensive health reform, much less heavily funding things like renewable energy.  And a great deal of that comes from, among other things, people associated with communities like DK keeping up the pressure within the Democratic Party rather than bolting.

  •  progressives are not (0+ / 0-)

    really liberals in the true sense of the word, they are poor facsimiles of the left and their choice to use another word to describe themselves gives away their cowardice or complete abandonment of the liberal agenda.

    its easy for the tea party and the right to stop obamas agenda because he does not have a left wing agenda in the first place and isn't willing to fight for one.

    obama has done some good things but he could have done much more or at least fought the good fight and imo he never did that.

  •  In agreement with Robert Reich (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peptabysmal, barleystraw

    This week Robert Reich published 6 points which progressives and tea party-ites could agree on and work together on. I think these are well worth thinking through. Many of these points center on distrust of bigness, too-big-to-fail banks, suspicion of military intervention, and international trade agreements.

  •  a National Progressive Lawyers Network (0+ / 0-)

    I think an interconnected national network of young progressive lawyers, running in groups, would be a way to approach this. Get a whole bunch of progressive lawyers elected to congress.

    Progressives from the ACLU, NARAL/Planned Parenthood, PIRG/Green, Labor Unions, etc., all together under 1 umbrella (election machine).

    Then you take over the traditional/social (inter)national media when they all run together. Run them as Democrats, which is what they would be.

    (**run them in waves even, to cover the mid-terms on the progressive end of things)

    Just crowd the TP/GOP out, is what I am saying.

    "....No Compromise in the Defense of Mother Earth!"

    by Seattle Socialist on Sun May 11, 2014 at 05:01:01 PM PDT

    •  i hope someone reads this all down here (0+ / 0-)

      i think its a good idea, the lawyer network idea there. ill have to blog some more about it later this week. i just thought of it like 1 hour ago.

      (someone's gonna be like: dude, we already have one of those. well i ain't heard of one yet.)

      "....No Compromise in the Defense of Mother Earth!"

      by Seattle Socialist on Sun May 11, 2014 at 05:25:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Geeky comment - but would you please add a tag? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Egberto Willies

    Egberto, would you mind adding "Plutocracy" to the list of tags on this diary?  I think it should be there.

    I'm a huge fan of meta-data, but it is hard to maintain. Daily Kos is an amazing tool to help folks come up to speed on things that they need to know; the meta-data helps them do that; my hat is off to the information architect(s) who came up with the site design.  I had not known about the Powell Memo before today, I'm glad I do now (I noticed you had the tag "Plutocracy" on your linked diary).

    Progressives must not allow the GOP to triangulate them by sectionalizing. Progressives must not allow Democrats to maintain Republican-lite stances.
    Well said, and thank you so much for the diary!

    “Now folks, by going on that web show, Barack Obama undermined the authority of the presidency. And that is Fox News' job.” - Stephen Colbert

    by Older and Wiser Now on Sun May 11, 2014 at 05:22:00 PM PDT

  •  Engagement absolutely is the key...and best (0+ / 0-)

    accomplished by more respectful listening so people feel heard and empowered.

  •  Confused by what you are saying (0+ / 0-)

    If the tea party blue print is vast sums of money backing an astro turfed movement then how do progressives who lack money follow their blue print?

    Seems to me that the way to win that game is not to play it since the deck is stacked against us.  What we need to do is work on building progressive institutions so that low cost grassroots politics is possible again.  Our main institution, the unions, have been worn away.  We need something to replace it.  I think it can be done.  We have to think about forming coops.

    "The real wealth of a nation consists of the contributions of its people and nature." -- Riane Eisler

    by noofsh on Sun May 11, 2014 at 07:00:18 PM PDT

  •  Nope......The Tea Party Lost! (0+ / 0-)

    They have now outlived their usefulness.  Now they are mainly a pain in the a*s to the Republican establishment.  A drag.  Flotsam & jetsum getting in Boehner, Cantor & McConnell's way.

    This is only a Tea Party first loss this cycle.  There will be others.  And....they were first hyped up by Santelli who is just another Republican establishment toy boy.

    Why...the Tea Party couldn't even stop Obamacare.  So....what good are they now?  They will be relegated to just carrying around Benghazi tote bags very soon if they're not careful.  

  •  How many tea-partiers to change a lightbulb? (0+ / 0-)

    1. BENGHAZI
    2. None. Give me filaments or give me dark.
    3. Change? The lightbulb is the problem.
    4. A blacklight bulb isn't really a lightbulb
    5. All of them, Charlie.
    6. It doesn't matter because they actually vote and get others to vote.

  •  typo in the link (0+ / 0-)

    The link with the origins of the Tea Party, with the Rick Santelli clip, says Fat "Car" Traders rather than Fat "Cat" Traders.

  •  Bizzarro World conclusions (0+ / 0-)

    the author must live in a teeny tiny little circle of people who run scampering from the Democratic Party every time one of them farts.
    You want change? Vote Democratic.
    You want to elect MORE Creepublicans? Waste your vote on a Green/Libertarian/Pastafarian party candidate.

    Simple math provides the answers to getting Creepublicans out of power.

    And, vote or shut up. If you don't vote, you get what you deserve and thanks (NOT) for dragging me and mine along with you on the way to the bottom.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site