Home

Dec. 12th, 2008

Economic collapse makes for strange politics...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/13/business/13auto.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

Well, the "leaders" in the Senate decided not to bailout the Big Three. It is interesting to note that the White House and the Democratic leadership supported the bailout, but Republicans did not.  We seem to be experiencing some weird ideological reverse-polarity here.

While in the article, Republicans voiced skepticism over whether the bailout proposal would work, they may have slit their own throats in relation to the 2010 mid-terms. If one or more of the big 3 fail, and the resulting mass layoffs occur, Democrats could stand to benefit by advancing a narrative that they tried to stop this from happening, but the Republicans abandoned the Big 3, and their employees, when they needed help the most. We will see how this all plays out.

As speculation, they may be opposing the bailout as a last-ditch effort to destroy the UAW as a viable labor force. Whatever your views on the UAW, if this is the course of action the Republicans are taking, it may be the political equivalent of a kamikaze attack. You may cause enormous damage to your target, while destroying yourself in the process.



May. 23rd, 2006

Democrats: planning to lose in 2006?

An illegal, illegitimate, and pointless war in Iraq, massive domestic spying on law-abiding citizens without warrants, botched responses to natural disasters, illegal leaks of sensitive intelligence - that's the Bush administration in action. Looks like a "slam-dunk" situation for the Democrats to regain both houses of Congress, right? Maybe not. The article from The Progressive, listed in its entirety below, shows that Democrats may be looking to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. And, it's not just a defeat for their party, it's a defeat for every citizen in the United States.

Why?

Even if Democrats win majorities in the House and Senate, it will not be a progressive majority needed to turn this country around when it comes to foreign policy, health care, the environment, workers rights, etc. "The party leadership continues to promote caution on withdrawing from Iraq, criticizing the President, or taking a stand against the aggressive and unconstitutional policies of this administration. The conventional wisdom--that taking too clear a position might get in the way of letting the Republicans hang themselves—is only strengthened by the fact that the Dems' chances are looking better in the polls now, even as they shy away from appearing to be too strong an opposition."

We currently have, in effect, no opposition in Congress to the center-right corporate-dominated coalition that is the Republican and Democratic Parties.

The Green Party is working to change that. Across the nation, Green candidates are mobilizing electorates, and bringing a new message of hope, accountibility, compassion, and citizern power to the people of this nation. Do you want a progressive majority in Congress? Green candidates are those progressive that we so desperately need. For more information on Green Party candidates near you, visit http://www.gp.org/press/pr_2006_05_15.shtml

********************

Published on Tuesday, May 23, 2006 by The Progressive
The Democrats' Losing Attitude
by Ruth Conniff
 

Conservatives are considering sulking at home during the upcoming midterms. Apparently, two rightwing appointments to the Supreme Court and an evangelical crusader in the White House are apparently not enough. Meanwhile, the Democrats are, for the first time, actually looking at a fighting chance to take over Congress, according to a front page story in Sunday's New York Times. A simultaneous rebuke to Bush from the right and the left may break the Republican stranglehold on government this fall. But dramatic political change is not necessarily at hand.

Even if the Democrats gain a majority in Congress in 2006, it won't be a progressive majority. The party leadership continues to promote caution on withdrawing from Iraq, criticizing the President, or taking a stand against the aggressive and unconstitutional policies of this administration. The conventional wisdom--that taking too clear a position might get in the way of letting the Republicans hang themselves—is only strengthened by the fact that the Dems' chances are looking better in the polls now, even as they shy away from appearing to be too strong an opposition.

If stalling is a viable strategy, why be surprised that some Dems are even promoting losing as a winning prospect? Really. Last week Tony Coelho told Adam Nagourney that NOT gaining majorities in the House and Senate might be better for Democrats, since then they won't be blamed for the mess the country is in. "The most politically advantageous thing for the Democrats is to pick up 11, 12 seats in the House and three or four seats in the Senate but let the Republicans continue to be responsible for government," Coelho, a former House Democratic whip, told the Times. "We are heading into this period of tremendous deficit, plus all the scandals, plus all the programs that have been cut. This way, they get blamed for everything."

So when, exactly, can we expect a change of direction? When the Republicans start governing responsibly, ending the deficit, reforming government, restoring domestic services, and rolling back the Bush tax cuts? It will be a cold day in Hell before the Democrats judge it a safe time to step up to the plate and take over.

And if they manage to stumble into power, what are the chances that the Democrats will take bold steps to rescue the country from all the bad policies this Administration has brought on us? Not much, judging by the nervous attitude of the current leadership.

Howard Dean incurred the wrath of House and Senate leaders when he declined to direct funds to the Congressional campaigns of the suddenly viable Democratic contenders, who are counting on the anyone-but-Bush-and-friends vote to get them into office. Instead, the DLC chair insists on continuing to fund state-level party-building activities. That sort of long term thinking is not particularly popular. But it might help cure what ails the Democrats. By bringing some grassroots candidates up through the ranks, it is possible that, in a few years, the party might actually have some candidates willing to take a chance on leading the country. Imagine.

Ruth Conniff is the political editor of The Progressive.

© 2006 The Progressive

###

May 2009

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31      

Advertisement

Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom
Powered by LiveJournal.com