Democrats in Distress - and their Suicide Queen (vanity, about Pelosi and the Democrats in general)

My Pointed Head | 11/08/02 | xm177e2

[xm177e2]

I'm sorry, you are correct, she probably isn't a socialist and I have no proof she carries a card.

I got my information from a right-wing source (one of the posts here about "socialists in congress") and I assumed the Progressive Caucus was connected with the DSA because of the Google Cache from their web site. I just assumed the DSA was operating the same way as the WWP, trying to hide their hand in things.

[aristeides]

Recent legislation does exempt small business from a lot. That's the work of the post-'94 Republican Congress. The '93 tax increase -- pre-Republican Congress -- did not include such exemptions.

[bain_sidhe]

I don't think she carries a card or considers herself a socialist either. She's always presented herself as a staunchly Democrat, and there's nothing in her background to suggest otherwise. It is worth being aware of the connection though, as well as the connection of the WWP to the anti-war protest in DC. It's a common tactic for one side to try to discredit the other side's ideas by pointing to the involvement of a few kooks. And those supporting the "non-kook" position need to be aware if kooks are involved. First, to be sure the kooks don't hijack the movement for their own nefarious purposes, and second, to be prepared to counter the "opposition" when they try to use the kooks to discredit the non-kooks.

On a side note, thanks for the link to Corn's article about the WWP and the protest in DC. I just read an article that mentioned the connection, but didn't go into any detail, and was wondering where I could get more information on it. Several people on DU went to the protest, and I don't think any of them knew of the involvement of the WWP or ANSWER, or what those groups are saying. This article is a good heads-up to those who oppose the war to exercise caution in aligning themselves with a group before they know what the group stands for. As Corn says, a large percentage of Americans are against the war (at least, right now) and even more are against unilateral action. It would be terrible if that entire opposition could be demonized and discredited just because Ramsey Clark thinks Saddam is a swell guy who hasn't done anything wrong.

[bain_sidhe]

Small quibble - the FMLA was passed by pre-Republican Congress, and IT exempts small businesses. But I don't doubt the benefits of divided government. And (surprise, surprise) I actually appreciated the Republican "obstructionist" role during Clinton's term in a few cases - for example blocking the worst parts of Clinton's "anti-terrorism" bill introduced after the Oklahoma bombing. (Or was it the first WTC bombing? Time flies, memory fades.) I wish they had done the same with the egregiously mis-named "PATRIOT" Act. I didn't like Clinton's search and surveillance provisions back then, when "my gal" was running the Justice Department - and I like the steroidal version of those provisions a damn sight less with Ashcroft in charge.

Memo to self and anybody else who will listen... NEVER give your friends power you wouldn't want your enemies to have!

[Walkin Man]

Conservative and moderate Democrats aren't going to stand idly by while the Suicide Queen Pelosi destroys their party. The infighting that will come of this threatens the party itself, it's an existential battle for its soul. It's going to get very, very, very ugly.

The democrat party sold its soul to Satan decades ago, the rats are just fighting over the corpse now. If Ford was allowed the post that Pelosi will get, I would really be worried that the demorats were getting smart. But it looks like they will go hard left and bury themselves and we can all enjoy the show!

[timestax]

its become Bubba's personal slush fund

BUMP $$$$$

[timestax]

bump

[aristeides]

its become Bubba's personal slush fund

That's why McAwful won't be fired.

[xm177e2]

Ahah! I found out a lot more about the Progressive Caucus/DSA connection. The DSA really did host the PC web site, that's a formal link.

And in that article it says TNR uses the same 60/40 term as I did! I feel so special now.

[xm177e2]

Here is a link to the TRB article.

[Jim Noble]

>>See also this thread: Pelosi to Ford: 'The Race is Over'<<

How hard would it have been for Nancy to say, "I look forward to a vigorous contest with one of the bright young leaders of our Party, and I just hope that I have enough friends to prevail"?

Sounds a lot better than, "Get back in your place, boy", doesn't it?

[Jim Noble]

>>The parties are 50/50 when the rats lie well enough to fool 15% of the people<<

I think you are exactly right.

RATs have 3 choices in a campaign:

1) Tell the truth about their goals and objectives-disaster (1984, 1988, 1994)

2) Say nothing about their goals and objectives-disaster (2002)

3) Lie about their goals and objectives-victory (1992, 1996).

The rise of the internet has made lying more difficult for them, however, because their media megaphones can be contradicted in real time and at little cost. Therefore, they are struggling between door #1 and door #2 (tell the truth or shut up).

Ain't it sweet?

[timestax]

bump

[bain_sidhe]

I found out a lot more about the Progressive Caucus/DSA connection. [...] And in that article it says TNR uses the same 60/40 term as I did! I feel so special now.

Yeah, but that's the World Net Daily! That would be like me quoting The New Re... uh, wait... (G)

(For those interested, here's a link to that New Republic article. I should also note, though, that The New Republic lost some of its credibility in progressive circles earlier this year when Roger Hertog (chairman of the conservative Manhattan Institute) and Michael Steinhardt (DLC BigWig) bought a two-thirds interest in it. Personally, I've seen some drift to the right - not a lot, mind you, just articles here and there that had me scratching my head over the fact, that they were coming from TNR. For more on the "liberal" take on the buy-out, check this article from The American Prospect.)

Seriously, this quote bears examining:

The Democratic Socialists of America's chief organizing goal is to work within the Democratic Party and remove the stigma attached to "socialism" in the eyes of most Americans. "Stress our Democratic Party strategy and electoral work," explains an organizing document of the DSA. "The Democratic Party is something the public understands, and association with it takes the edge off. Stressing our Democratic Party work will establish some distance from the radical subculture and help integrate you to the milieu of the young liberals."

Again, it's a matter of what they say they're doing. I haven't seen any Dems pushing socialism - as defined by the DSA - in their platform or their legislative initiatives. And even the Progressive Caucus's economic stimulus plan (warning, this is a MS Word Document link) includes no call to "a new social and economic order in which workers and consumers will take responsibility for and control of production" as the Socialist Party's platform calls for - and if they ever did such a thing I'd oppose them as much (well, ok, maybe almost as much) as you would.

It's interesting, to note too, that Pelosi is getting hit from the other side as well... this article from the progressive website "Common Dreams" came out against Pelosi - because she wasn't progressive enough!

But, even though I don't think Pelosi will advocate (or even supports) many of the positions in the Socialist Party Platform, you are correct that it's something we'll have to watch for.

One more thought on the World Net Daily article... I followed the link to their "expose" on the DSA/Progressive Caucus connection, and had to laugh (just a little, though, because it's more scary than funny) at this line:

Next time you wonder why our nation is tumbling down the slippery slope toward socialism, dictatorship and repression, don't forget the active role played by this group of dedicated, professional malcontents

I'd agree that Republican control of all three branches of the government won't include any "slide" toward socialism (more like feudalism, in my opinion, but that's just me) - but in my mind, it's Bush who poses the greatest threat of "dictatorship and repression" that this nation has seen in a very long time - maybe ever. The things Bush has done to make his administration unaccountable to anybody, let alone the people, and the repressive tactics employed by Ashcroft, are the nightmare scenario conservatives (or at least, libertarians) have warned about for years. Except, they said Clinton would bring it about.

But even libertarians are waking up. Check this article opposing the Homeland Security Department by William F. Jasper, Rise of the Garrison State, on the John Birch Society's website. The blurb says "Using the pretext of responding to terrorist threats, president Bush proposed changes that, in reality, have long been planned to consolidate police-state powers at the federal level." That, and many of the other comments in the article (not all of them, to be sure) would be equally at home in any current left-wing publication! In fact, here's one from CounterPunch that says virtually the same thing.

YIKES!

And xm177e2, you are special... didn't you know that already?

[xm177e2]

That would be like me quoting The New Re... uh, wait...

Hey, I like TNR.

Anyway, the point of me posting the "expose" wasn't to prove Pelosi was a socialist (I've already said I was wrong), but to point out the links between the DSA and the PC.

[Lady Heron]

Why it's such a good idea... Do you ever watch West Wing? It's the same sentiment expressed by the character played by Ron Silver (Bruno, I think his name is), who said in one episode:

Oh brother!! Enough said!!

[corlorde]

lol, excellent thread, thanks.

~Corey

[Fiddlstix]

Bump

[slouper]

"Perhaps this shift left sets the stage for Hillary to come to the rescue as a "moderate democrat" who would be welcome with open arms after this far left shift?"

BINGO!

[bain_sidhe]

Oh, I like TNR too, most of the time. But I know people further left than I am who have been... um, less than pleased with some of the recent articles.

And you're right about the connection between the Progressive Caucus and the DSA - it's obviously there. I was arguing a different point, I guess - that the DSA's influence isn't as great as the DSA would like to think it is. But I guess that's the way of all fringe groups trumpeting their "association" with more mainstream ones. It's a way to give themselves a sense of legitimacy, because, let's face it, socialism just isn't going to happen in this country.