Sen. Sherrod Brown, a Democrat from Ohio, said that even union sympathizers were surprised at the degree to which the Republicans’ approach “blew up in their faces” and that “the poll numbers of support for collective bargaining for public-sector workers are stronger than even most labor supporters expected.”
Another surprise: the extent to which Democrats, long wary of being accused of “class warfare,” are now more eager than ever to cast the GOP as the party of the privileged.
Democrats aren’t going to win the future, politically, just by being on the right side of social issues. Rich versus poor (and middle-class) is where the rubber hits the road. When Democrats dominated politically, they did so by being the party of the middle-class. And let’s not mince words: overt hostility towards the wealthy was part of it.
That means demonizing the Koch brothers and their ilk…fairly or unfairly. That’s just how it has to be for now.
patrick II
You are taking that “comrade” moniker seriously.
Couldn’t agree more though.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
Well, you know, the
ConfederateRepublican Party actually *is* the party of the privileged, and they will come for all of us who get in their way. So we need to keep pointing that out, loudly and repeatedly.Cris
And let’s go all Bush Doctrine on the first talking point: it doesn’t matter if the Democrats themselves are wealthy, as long as they’re fighting for the right people.
Davis X. Machina
Angry and engaged minorities roll apathetic and distracted majorities all the time in politics. There was a time when The Left (and do I ever miss Norbizness) was, at least some of the time, in some places, the angry and engaged minority.
That was before The Left discovered how tasty and nutritious a diet consisting largely of eating your own could be.
Comrade DougJ
@Cris:
Sure, FDR was no Big Russ economically.
joe from Lowell
Google results for Rasmussen public unions.
I see a one poll dating back to May 2010.
I see a few others dating from February 2011, in which Rasmussen crows about how Walker is winning and unions’ popularity is dropping. Oopsie, Scottie.
So…what are we to make of this? First, that this assault on unions has been long-planned, and second, that the union-busters really did think they’d be able to get public opinion on their side.
Oh, and third: that Scott Rasmussen’s samples are consistently skewed towards those who are most influenced by Republican messaging.
danimal
Amen. Preach it again and again.
As Warren Buffett supposedly said, “If there’s class warfare, my side’s winning.”
The rich have had their run for too long, it’s time to rebuild the middle class and restore hope to the working class.
bjacques
It’s not being unfair that’s the problem; it’s trying not to sound crazy. You can only drop so much science before pegging people’s WTF?-meters.
uptown
What’s the point of being wealthy if the masses don’t hate you for it?
Zifnab
I think you score more points hitting people fairly than unfairly. And it’s not like the Koch Brothers or the Murdoch family or the Trumps aren’t so prim and proper that it’s hard to find something to fairly demonize them over.
But fighting the rich is expensive. Especially with the gloves off after Citizen’s United. Obama is getting cozy with GE’s CEO. Feinstein’s family money comes from military contracting. Goldman Sachs has the money to buy anyone with a price tag.
Who is going to sponsor the Democratic National Convention if you piss of AT&T and Comcast? Who is going to hire ex-Senator Liebermann as a consultant if you’re mean to the banks?
The money boys have their hooks in. Dems aren’t breaking free so easily.
Cris
@Comrade DougJ: I know it’s no longer fashionable to hold up Edwards as a good example, but I’ll do it anyway. John Edwards had the most progressive platform of the 2008 primary frontrunners, but his opponents tried to hold up his net worth as an argument that his stances were disingenuous. The epitome of ad hominem.
Expect that same line of attack as this fight escalates.
cleek
“their ilk”… is ilk defined by income or by attitude ?
because what’s really the problem is not the wealthy, it’s the greedy. it’s not Buffet, it’s Koch.
beltane
This is all kind of sad as it shows how deeply the Democrats have taken the advice of the Villagers to heart all these years. The reason the beltways courtiers clutch their pearls at any mention of the rhetoric of class warfare isn’t that such rhetoric is unpopular with the public; it is that it is too popular with the public. If such rhetoric wasn’t powerfully appealing to many people, the right would not have spent so much time engaged in red-baiting.
Comrade DougJ
@Cris:
I’m with you on that. I was a supporter of his, I’m not ashamed to admit.
Jim Pharo
Why “unfairly”? I don’t see any upside in “unfairly” demonizing the wealthy. I think it’s entire fair to point out that as a group this class has outsized wealth and income, and that we need to adjust that.
Unfair maligning is the stock-in-trade of the other side, and I don’t think we need it or want it.
kdaug
Don’t hate the rich. Aim to be one of ’em some day.
But the inheritors who contribute nothing to our “collective sacrifice”? Hrm.
Eisenhower levels. 90% over $330M/yr.
Let’s rebuild the goddamned country.
beltane
@uptown: For some reason, our overlords aren’t satisfied with wealth and power alone. They seem to have a near pathological need for validation, to be told that they are the worthiest of worthies. Maybe they should consider counseling.
one_outer
Well, putting some hostility in the rhetoric would be a step forward.
Of course, to expect that to translate to action is as stupid as buying Obama’s schtick three years ago.
At least the words will get prettier while the collaborationist liberals continue to sing kumbaya with the fascists and screw us.
SteveinSC
In Re: “This is how we do it.”
“They are unanimous in their hate for me – and I welcome their hatred”–FDR
No, THAT’S the way to do it.
Omnes Omnibus
@cleek: Attitude, definitely attitude. No need to dig up FDR and Teddy Kennedy to burn them posthumously at the stake. Boehner and Ryan who lack the wealth but subscribe to the views? Up against the wall. How’s that?
Delia
Whaddya mean unfairly? The Kochs just write the lines for us.
Ask Charles Koch what he thinks about Obama and he looks like he’s just bit into a lemon. “He’s a dedicated egalitarian,” Charles said.
Shinobi
Well apparently as long as you have money behind you you get to make laws by royal decree, and then enforce them no matter what anybody says.
Must be nice to be a republican in Wisconsin.
Bob Loblaw
@Comrade DougJ:
And when Edwards finally crawls out from that rock he’s been hiding under (around 2018 or so, I’d expect), I’m sure he’d be grateful to hear it.
eemom
what does demonizing them “unfairly” consist of?
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Cris:
@Omnes Omnibus:
These. And I think Boner is rich, not Kennedy/Bush/Roosevelt rich, but quite affluent.
Keith G
It’s too bad that the White House is being so low-key in this issue.
Take the last Herbert essay , add the post below about GE and this from Kevin Drum about budget cuts:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2011/03/taking-aim-poor
And I see more than enough fuel for a strong and successful populist push back. I know this is Obama’s M.O., but I wonder if important opportunities are being missed.
Davis X. Machina
@beltane:
Deus lo vult. They live in fear and trembling, because while right now they appear, on the basis of outward signs, to be among the Elect, there is no way of knowing for sure, short of the grave, that they are in fact, among the elect.
A merciful God, however, cannot be so wantonly cruel as to have His elect live in terror. So to assuage their fears, and show His mercy, our overlords have to have all of our stuff.
The greater the visible signs, the greater the certainty of election, the lesser the fear and trembling. And progressive taxation is blasphemy, substituting the fallible, mortal judgments of human legislators for the perfect and ineffable divine Will.
Tonal Crow
@SteveinSC:
This. 1000 times this. Enough with the “Republicans have good points, but we just need to tweak their ideas a little” rhetoric fail. Tell America the truth: Republicans are making war on everyone who’s not hyper-rich.
Menu
As if certain Dems beef with demonizing the Koch brothers and their ilk is that it may be unfair.
It is a nice fantasy.
Most have been just as fearful of engaging in class warfare because well, why bite the hand that feeds them?
Maude
Why would anyone interrupt this movie?
People who pay attention at all to the news see what’s going on.
If your opposition is heading for the cliff, watch them go over.
I wouldn’t give the right anything to turn around and use as an attack.
Edit: The worst thing you can do to attention seekers is to ignore them or keep silent.
Dennis SGMM
I’d posit that the missing piece here is finding pols who care enough about doing the right thing to get off of their asses and fight for it. As it stands, the reward for cravenness is re-election until such time as one has enough bulge to take a lucrative job as a lobbyist or a consultant. Rocking the boat is a resume killer for that kind of work.
Omnes Omnibus
@Shinobi: There is a preliminary hearing on this case tomorrow in Madison. I can guarantee you that the judge will have sharp words for administration officials. In addition, contempt citations are possible. I am sure that the judge will extend the injunction, make it clear that her order covers all officials within the state, and emphasize that the injunction means that the status quo will remain in effect until the suit is resolved.
In other words, Fitzwalker stupidly overreached.
piratedan
its that moral equivalency thing that gets me… you know, the folks that watched the economy crash and burn and saw retirement portfolios get reduced in value by 50%, along the same lines as home equity values and actual people working for a living were all dramatically reduced and they were screaming for their bonuses to be honored from their contracts, they spared no thoughts for the plights of others, its those folks that I would like to see left out on Arizona 86 in nothing more than their underwear somewhere between the towns of Why and Sells. That might make me smile a bit. Kind of like seeing the Koch Brothers spend a week confined to a room of a government run retirement center.
Comrade DougJ
@eemom:
Don’t want to say because if I do, people will say “you admitted that was unfair”.
kdaug
Forgot the pronouns again. Gotta a habit of doin’ that.
“I don’t hate the rich”.
And “I aim to be one of them someday”.
Hope y’all will forgive me.
Nicole
If the Kochs don’t like it, they can always go cry on a bag of money.
eemom
@Cris:
it’s not that it’s “unfashionable,” it’s that he’s a bad example. The guy was a hypocrite and a liar with no principles. If he talked a good game it was for no purpose other than self-promotion. He was a complete and total fraud.
Surely there’s a better example than him.
Comrade DougJ
@Keith G:
I’m not sure the White House should do this, not right now. I think Obama should probably stay above it, a bit.
One mistake the Bush WH made was letting W get involved with the mud fights too much.
Violet
@Keith G:
I think it would be more effective if there were populist attack dogs on the left who could do the tough work of pointing out over and over how the Republicans are screwing the middle class. That way Obama could still keep the calm and reasonable position and not scare away the stupid white voters who are afraid of an angry black man.
Edit: Although I’d like to see Obama forcefully stand up for the little guy. That might work too. Just don’t know.
Shinobi
@Omnes Omnibus: Good. I find that I am so stunned by his hubris that I don’t even know how to react rationally to it. That’s what law people are for I guess.
Earl Butz
@cleek: Sweet Jesus. How do you think Buffett makes his money, digging gold out of the ground with a little spoon all by his lonesome?
No.
He exploits labor, just like any other successful capitalist does. So for God’s sake, you can give the man credit for being candid, but don’t fucking pretend he’s not on the exact same side as the Koch maggots when all is said and done.
@Zifnab: And bullshit attitudes like this is why progressives lose. Every single time.
Omnes Omnibus
@Comrade DougJ: So you are suggesting a free fire zone and, if it spills over into unfairness here and there, we can just regret the collateral damage?
singfoom
It’s not demonizing if it is the truth. It is fact that the Koch brothers have supported multiple think tanks, an entire ecology of wingnut welfare in order to get their message of tax cuts for me, but not for thee as broadly as possible, sexed up with think tank credentials.
They are interested in preserving their incredible wealth at the expense of all and everything else that exists.
They can sugar coat their ideas, talk about ‘ownership’ and innovation and markets, but in the end, it comes down to them wanting to keep the entire pie and sell pieces of it to the rest of us, ala carte, at jacked up prices.
They recognize no interest but their own, and therefore the public interest is that of those who “don’t want to work” and want “handouts”.
Let’s just call a demon a demon, ok?
gex
@beltane: What you are observing is the smallest part of them that realizes that they have unfair advantages which must be silenced by the constant rationalization that they deserve it.
Comrade DougJ
@Omnes Omnibus:
Yes.
Chet
@danimal: Imagine Hideki Tojo denouncing the U.S. as an aggressor nation for declaring war against Japan on 12/8/41.
That’s basically what Republicans bleating about “class warfare” makes me think of.
danimal
@beltane:
Yep, yep, yep. The Dems have all the tools they need to campaign for economic fairness effectively, but they stockpile their biggest rhetorical weapons.
Why are they afraid to win?
eemom
@Comrade DougJ:
what people? The paid Koch brother trolls who infest this blog?
If there’s one meme around here that is 100% fantasy,(and to be sure there is more than one) it’s those “paid” trolls that people keep finding under their beds. I never heard anything so stupid. We blogbots are an infinitesimal percentage of the public. Ain’t worth $.50 to troll us, even to the Koch brothers.
Villago Delenda Est
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
The GOP is the party of labor theft.
That’s the meme. They want to steal your labor, and any fruits derived from it (pensions, social security, you name it).
They are thieves. They become rich through theft. They’re like the Goodfellas without the comedy.
gex
@Earl Butz: Buffet was all for Wall Street accountability when it was fashionable. Not so much for ratings agencies. For some mysterious reason…
Kathy in St. Louis
I disagree with the premise that the Dems are casting the GOP as the party of privilege. The GOP has proudly done that all on its own. The only time the GOP seems willing to acknowledge the working class is when they need their votes or when they can misdirect them through class warfare issues.
Not to put it too finely, the majority of the new GOP stink out loud.
Villago Delenda Est
@Delia:
ZOMG…so that’s what Kenyan-Islamo-Socia1ism will get us…an egalitarian society, where your position is not determined on how much money you’ve inherited from your dad who did business with Stalin, but on your own merits as an individual!
Do you know that Thomas Jefferson felt that getting an inheritance tax on the books was one of his greatest achievements…because he desperately wanted to prevent an aristocracy by birth in all but name from taking root in this country and perpetuating tyranny to preserve their position.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Just to take the discussion away from Edwards, and I was also a supporter*, we can also look back to Al Gore. “We’re for the people, they’re for the powerful”. He was accused of class warfare, mocked for his words and his fashion choices, and that was also (and I may be misunremembering) when the polls turned around for him.
*I supported Edwards, even after it was clear he was toast, precisely because he talking about the wealth divide and the disappearing middle class, not because of anything about him. I don’t get personally invested in politicians; Barack Obama was never my new bicycle, so I don’t want to jump in front of a train every time he shows that he’s flawed.
Dennis SGMM
@eemom:
For a long time I have believed that America is sufficiently stocked with idiots so as to make paying a troll redundant.
Earl Butz
Doug, I understand why you threw that in there but it is a crock of shit. There is no “fair or unfair” when the stakes are your life and livelihood and the other guy has all the advantages.
Remember what they finally put Capone away for? Income tax evasion. Not decades of crime, but income tax evasion, and you know why? Because that’s all they had to fight him with. The FBI knew how to win a fight.
Progressives think we should all just sit down and hug it out. And that’s why there’s not a single one in national elected office, while the goddamned Tea Partiers are running 19 states now.
KG
Count me among those that aren’t on board with unfair criticism. Unfair criticism blows up in the criticizer’s face, always does. You play dirty and that opens the door to “see, both sides do it, and are completely full of shit.” If you really believe your side is right, then you don’t need to play dirty, you don’t need to lie (which is what unfair criticism will be seen as).
joe from Lowell
We have a two-party system.
One of those parties is the Republicans. Right now, they are engaged in a coordinated full-court press to abolish unionism.
The other party, their opposition, is the Democrats.
Which side are you on, boys, which side are you on?
(Hint: “Boo-hoo, this fallen world isn’t good enough for me!” doesn’t answer the question.)
We have a two-party system. Which side are you on?
eemom
anyway it’s a SERIOUS question. HTF is it possible to “unfairly” criticize a soul-dead drek of humanity?
Let’s start with an easy one. What would be an “unfair” criticism of, say, Rush Limbaugh?
eemom
@KG:
what do YOU think is an unfair criticism then?
Lies are lies are lies, and there’s no excuse for that in any context. That’s not the issue here.
danimal
@eemom: I’ve never accused anyone of being a paid troll, but I strongly suspect they exist. There are several liberal blogs with enormously annoying trolls that obviously exist to derail the conversation or make the discussion completely unreadable. Most of the BJ trolls are just being dicks voluntarily, but that doesn’t make the concept of paid blog trolls unthinkable.
It’s naive to think that political rivals are above this sort of mischief. While small in absolute numbers, blogs do have an effect on shaping the discourse. If the issue is important enough to the pocketbook, rest assured that paid trolls will be there.
Omnes Omnibus
@eemom: Comparing him to Pol Pot would probably be unfair.
KG
@joe from Lowell: well, if it’s either or, “you’re with us or against us”, then I’m going to opt for neither. Instead, I’ll look for someplace that has at least three of the following: good surf, good beer, beautiful women, and Cuban cigars.
singfoom
@joe from Lowell: It’s true that we have a two-party system, but it feels like a one party system.
Yes, I will vote democrat, and yes I will get out there to help us elect democrats, but I don’t think it’s non-productive to point out we have many Democrats who seem to share the same interests as those of the GOP.
I’m not talking purity here, I’m talking practicality. You can’t go out there and try to make a message stick about class warfare or trying to get the rich to pay their share of taxes while you’ve got Democratic Senators (who are millionaires themselves) walking those points back because it makes them uncomfortable around independents and socially conservative democrats.
I’m all for the people party, which is somewhat represented by the Democrats, but some Democrats seem to be working for the money party, regardless of the D in front of their name.
Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people)
Weird: every Washington Post article linked to at BJ over the past few days triggers a Firefox warning page labeled “Untrusted Connection.” I’m going to take the hint.
Omnes Omnibus
@Felanius Kootea (formerly Salt and freshly ground black people): Foxes are clever, you know.
Shinobi
It occurs to me that the next election is really going to be about what is more important to the American middle class, having only old white men in office, or having money in their pockets.
KG
@eemom: I think attacking someone’s personal life is unfair criticism in most cases – there are some cases where it might be justified, particularly if you’re talking about social issues (the jackasses who have six divorces or man-servants but oppose gay marriage in defense of “traditional marriage” should get no cover). But if we’re talking economic issues? Then there isn’t any reason to go there. My point is, basically, focus on the issues.
Church Lady
@Earl Butz: And don’t forget Buffet’s two rules:
Rule #1: Don’t lose money.
Rule #2: Remember Rule #1.
I think it’s great that he’s donating almost all of his money to the Gates Foundation. Hopefully, they will do good things with it. Of course, this is after having already given his children a good size chunk of his change. On the other hand, because it’s all going to the Gates Foundation, that’s a shit ton of inheritance tax that the Treasury will never see.
Parallel 5ths (Ionian Steel)
The language of class warfare is like music to my ears.
But aren’t swing voters historically squeamish about that?
Delia
@Villago Delenda Est:
Yeah, and there’s that little line near the beginning of the Declaration of Independence” “We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal . . .” I guess the Kochs and the Weekly Standard, and probably Glenn Beck, will now be campaigning against that old agitator Tom Jefferson. Who also spent a lot of time in France.
singfoom
@Parallel 5ths (Ionian Steel): What is this mythical creature you speak of? On what pendulum does it swing?
What makes a swing voter a swing voter? Low info and go with the flow? What’s the definition?
I think it’s like a snipe.
FormerSwingVoter
@Shinobi:
Can I be in charge of the campaign ads for whoever runs against Walker? He’s so over the top that you could put anything in a voice-over and people wouldn’t think you’d gone too far. “Scott Walker. Coward. Traitor. Fascist.” The ads practically write themselves.
Dennis SGMM
@joe from Lowell:
When I’m confronted with a binary choice to represent the needs and aspirations of a few hundred million diverse people my first thought is that the game has already been rigged beyond redemption. Like singfoom, I will continue to vote Democratic and work to elect Democrats. Unlike you, apparently, my support is not uncritical.
Parallel 5ths (Ionian Steel)
@singfoom:
Low info and go with the flow?
I think that’s it. I’ve never seen one in the wild either. But a lot of money gets spent, and a lot of issues get either a wide birth or made into a fussy display, all in an effort to court them. Right?
Violet
@Shinobi:
Fixed to highlight the real issue. Will the demographic trends shown in the census finally show up in this election?
Steaming Pile
I’m all for that. Call it the Powell Doctrine for Democratic politics. Go big, or go home. Shock and awe. The whole enchilada. Collateral damage? What collateral damage? All I see are a whole bunch of right-wing twits who needed to have their fee-fees hurt.
Dennis SGMM
@Parallel 5ths (Ionian Steel):
I think that there must be a substantial cohort that votes on the basis of the last commercial they saw before going to the polling place.
Violet
@Zifnab:
Heard a tiny bit of a speech by Glenn Greenwald, followed by Q&A. Someone asked him about Citizen’s United and how big an impact it would make. He said he didn’t think it would make all that much difference. He felt corporations were already able to impact elections with special interest ads. The only difference now is that they could donate directly to the candidates instead of having the sham of creating “Concerned Citizens for Increasing The Use of Corn Syrup” type PACS and then running ads.
I don’t read Greenwald, so don’t know if he’s been writing about this, but I found it kind of interesting.
Tim, Interrupted
@eemom:
ah geez…NO principles? None?
How do you know he was a COMPLETE and TOTAL fraud? The man is pure, unadulterated evil in every aspect of his soul and body and mind? And you of course, know this because…how?
Naturally, of course, and it goes without saying, there have been NO men or women throughout history who have done far more good than ill and who also had mistresses and children on the side, or who other wise kept any dark personal secrets. None, I say, none!
Oh wait…MLK, to name just one of thousands.
You are so presumptuous and judgemental of people about whom you know almost nothing that it is…oh never, mind, it’s the eemommy way.
Your self righteous puritanism is of that weird American sort, I suppose, but that doesn’t excuse it.
However, this wound-tight, panty sniffing aspect of your personality does explain a lot of your hateful and hypocritical language.
(Please note that I have not called you any foul names, nor childishly referenced imagined portions of your anatomy in this comment. Please do likewise. Thanks)
Parallel 5ths (Ionian Steel)
@Dennis SGMM: And would vote for an Arby’s roast beef if it was on the ballot.
cleek
@Earl Butz:
oy.
if this is gonna turn into some kind of fucking dilettante young-Marxist meeting, count me the fuck out.
you let me know when the Koch boys admit that they’re winning the class war, or when they complain about the unfairness of having to pay less in taxes than their secretaries.
you let me know when either of the Kochs say this:
or this:
or this:
Jay C
@Shinobi:
Unfortunately, the Republicans are going to do their well-funded damndest to make sure that the “American middle class” gets the notion that the two alternatives are one and the same: and sadly, there is an irreducible minimum of the electorate (that infamous “28%”) who will not only fall for the false dichotomy, but vigorously get out and campaign for it.
OzoneR
I think it depends on how far the GOP does. Cutting budgets didn’t do it, trying to get rid of collective bargaining did it.
For all that they claim to want “change,” the American people hate “change” whether it be overhauling healthcare or taking away collective bargaining.
They like the status quo, they just want it to work.
eemom
@Tim, Interrupted:
GFY, asshole. (Oops. Just slipped out.)
You have NO idea WTF I was talking about re Edwards. Being a knee-jerk moron, of course you assumed it was a simple-minded judgment about his marital infidelities. It wasn’t.
And you’re the last one to talk about presumtion and judgment.
God you’re an asshole.
Ooops.
Frank
I agree with those who say unfair attacks are not the way forward. When basic unfairness is recognized, it creates, if you will, negative karma; in other words, the other side will feel still more justified to unfairly treat the Dems. I’m reminded of that line from Jerry Maguire — “Integrity matters…” (I paraphrase.) Yes, I know the other side does it to us all the time. And I concede that the stakes are high and that a bit of subterfuge is often very effective. Do we want to win that way? Yeah, losing with one’s integrity intact is cold comfort. I just don’t know that I want to win the game when I stepped out of bounds back on the forty-yard-line.
Lysana
@Villago Delenda Est:
All this discussion about the founders of this country, who admittedly were fairly rich overall, has me wondering what the socio-economic status was of your average Tory.
singfoom
@Parallel 5ths (Ionian Steel): But Arby’s Roast beef is one with the people! Freedom tastes like cheese sauce!
Linda Featheringill
@eemom:
Anything he doesn’t have control of. Some physical characteristic that is genetically determined. The man really is ugly, but I’m not sure he can help it.
On the other hand, saying he is saying stupid things is fair game because he does have a brain and therefore has chosen to say all of those stupid things.
Mnemosyne
@Violet:
Of course, this last election proved him completely wrong in that estimation. Citizens United had a huge impact on who got elected because of who got all of the corporate money (ie Republicans). Democrats were outspent on nearly every race.
I’d be curious to see if he’s revisited the subject or if he insists he’s still right.
Zifnab
@Earl Butz:
There’s a lot to go after fairly. I don’t see why – when folks paint big bullseyes on their chests – you need to aim for their groins.
Keith G
@Violet:
@Comrade DougJ:
I understand and somewhat agree. Yet, there is no one organizing “our message” so at times the other side wins by default. Even if their victory is temporary, we still have to spend extra effort undoing the damage.
Bill Arnold
@Zifnab:
Because they’re probably wearing a bulletproof vest…
(I’m in the fair-argument camp, but recognize that when the media congenitally unable to not say “both sides do it” then it is reasonable for at least some elements of both sides to do it.)
Yevgraf (fka Michael)
@Shinobi:
Il Douche has made his decree. It must be obeyed.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Cris: I was an Edwards supporter,for his ideas, as you note. Than I went to an event, and as soon as he entered the room, my pathology meter rang. Since it’s never let me down, I soured on him. When asked why, I told people the truth: that having been in his proximity, i found something “off” about him. It made me a bit less popular in some circles, heh. When the stories came out, a couple of people remembered, and mentioned it to me.
Catsy
I think the problem here is that people are defining their terms differently, because the word “unfair” is a highly subjective one that is impossible to empirically evaluate. What’s “unfair” to one person may not seem so to another.
I interpreted the “unfairly” part of DougJ’s post as referring to negative campaigning, personal attacks, hyperbole, and emotional argument. Demonization of the enemy–and make no mistake, today’s Republican party and the wealthy plutocrats who drive its agenda are enemies to both Americans and basic American principles.
We shouldn’t be afraid to say so. We should be willing to directly accuse them of causing death and poverty to millions of Americans, of pushing a radical agenda that is destroying this country and its economy. And we should accept that playing dirty–to the extent permitted by law–is going to be necessary in order to effectively defeat these domestic enemies and their malignant agenda.
That is not the same thing as saying we should blatantly lie or break the law. It’s not only wrong, it’s unnecessary–the truth of who and what these people stand for is bad enough. But we need to get over the notion that if we all sit down and patiently explain the merits of our positions and meet our opponents halfway, we’ll find a middle ground that will make everyone happy and resolve our differents. That kind of approach only works with people who are operating in good faith and hold sane opinions, and right now the number of elected Republicans who meet both of those criteria can probably be counted on one hand. There is no middle ground to be had with insanity–you don’t try to compromise with someone who proposes to shoot your entire family by negotiating about which ones you’ll allow them to shoot. You destroy them and make sure they are never again allowed in a position where they can threaten you like that again.
That is what is at stake here. We are dealing with a party led by madmen and Bond villains who have become completely divorced from reality and incapable of negotiating in good faith.
Tim, Interrupted
@eemom:
You are so predictable. Nothing but bile. you have the intellect and gutter mind of an adolescent. Oh, and you’re lying.
So pray tell the class…what secret thoughts about Edwards you have to share which explain your judgement?
Linda Featheringill
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
Edwards’ pathology:
That leaves us with the question: Is our observation that the rich people are engaging in class war against the rest of us so extreme that only crazy people and charlatans will speak of it?
Ruckus
@Church Lady:
It’s OK that the IRS doesn’t see that inheritance tax money. The money is not being inherited.
That’s why @Villago Delenda Est: made the following comment:
Do you know that Thomas Jefferson felt that getting an inheritance tax on the books was one of his greatest achievements…because he desperately wanted to prevent an aristocracy by birth in all but name from taking root in this country and perpetuating tyranny to preserve their position.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@singfoom: That’s it exactly; thanks. That’s the difference between the Kochs, on one hand, and the rich folks like Buffet, Gates and Soros on the other. And then the demon has the nerve to whine when a tiny bit of light is pointed at the sexed up, think tank credentialed propaganda, and invitation only policy enclaves that include Supreme Court justices and upper level legislators. Cry me a river, then drown in it, dipweeds.
Montana
When I was a kid I lived in Utah, and the Boy Scouts was taken over by Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS Church). This, so called religion, practices underage polygamy, they send the boy s off on missions to divide the underage sisters among the dirty old men of the clan. Now when these underage girls get pregnant, these same dirty old men, send them to the state to get their welfare checks . You should see some of the palace homes that are paid with welfare checks (not on just one of course). By the way this is the newest religion that was created right here in United States of America, I guess their also in AZ, CA, NM, TX, NV, CO, OK. When someone hides behind religion to do or say something that is wrong we should stand up and point it out (right the wrong). Someone should ask Glenn Beck about it, he seems to have all the answers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iisl-xH3Xs
Violet
@Mnemosyne:
It was a speech he gave just a few weeks ago, so I think he was taking the recent election into account in his remarks.
Keith G
@eemom: Golden.
Bobby Thomson
Trying to envision an unfair criticism of the Koch
suckersbrothers.Sorry, not seeing it.
Vibrant Pantload, fka Studly Pantload
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
Interesting story.
I remember back during the primaries when Lawrence O’Donnell went off on Edwards (in writing) with both barrels. Having been an Edwards supporter at the time, I thought O’Donnell had lost it.
Within a fairly short time after that, the news broke on Edwards’ infidelity. What was upsetting to me about all that wasn’t the infidelity, per se – every politician will have thier personal warts – but that he risked carrying this ticking timbe bomb of a story to the general election, which in likelihood would have handed to White House to McCain. The recklessness was chilling.
After that, O’Donnell was ensconced on my People to Pay Attention To list.
Tonal Crow
@Violet:
Citizens United does not permit corporations to donate unlimited amounts directly to candidates. It permits them to spend unlimited amounts on their own ads. Previously they were prohibited from “electioneering communications” (basically airing ads advocating the election or defeat of a candidate) within N days of an election. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission .
Triassic Sands
It’s not like it’s difficult to demonize the rich fairly. I mean, gosh, what could one ever say about Bill Gates that wouldn’t be flattering to the guy who became the richest man in the world by cranking out crappy software and playing the game in such a slimy way that John D. Rockefeller himself would have been impressed?
Bill Arnold
@a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):
I never trusted Edwards. He seemed like someone who spent an excessive amount of time practicing his voicecraft in front of a mirror. That and a visceral distrust of trial lawyers.
For some reason, BObama doesn’t set off the same alarms, at least not for most people on the left.
Violet
@Tonal Crow:
Right. I knew I wrote that wrong when I posted it, but was too lazy to look up the exact ruling. Sigh. In any case, Greenwald still felt the ruling itself didn’t make that much difference because he felt we’re living in an oligarchy and the one ruling didn’t really change that much. He’s in support of robust federal campaign financing instead of outside financing as a way to get around the issue. Not sure how or if that would really work.
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
energy is the metaphor for the problem with the wealthy.
all of the entrenched and connected capital in energy is in coal, nat gas and oil.
new capital cannot come along and level the playing field enough to grow solar and wind and all the energy that if it were a finished product, people would say, well sure, its obviously better.
the effect of entrenching the rich, is that they entrench only themselves as having the capital to make any sort of big idea viable.
most of us need them just enough, to permit them to continue, out of fear of real consequences. that fear is all that is needed to maintain the status quo.
Frank
anymom lives in a pretty mad town
(with oh such anger flying around)
chats forums confabs visits
she swears her rage she spews her isn’ts
geg6
@Catsy:
I’m sure this thread is dead as a doornail, but…
THIS. THIS. THIS.
Tonal Crow
@Catsy: Well said.
And to emphasize something implicit in your argument: we must speak to voters’ emotions, not just to their intellects. That’s because emotions rule most people most of the time, with their intellects trailing along for the ride and to provide the rationalizations for what the emotions decide.
Republican officeholders, potential officeholders, and their fellow travellers in the media know this. It’s time we learned and applied it. And Democratic officeholders and potential officeholders, too.
Duncan Dönitz (formerly Otto Graf von Pfmidtnöchtler-Pízsmőgy, Mumphrey, et al.)
I’ve said it before: It’s time to begin making noise about bringing back the 88% top marginal rate from the Eisenhower years (that fucking soc¡alist). To be truthful, I’d be happy with, oh, say, 50 or 60% on the top rate, but, shit, let’s at least make them sweat a little first. I would be all for an 88% rate on all income from dividends above $1,000,000, though.
kdaug
@singfoom:
Stoled.
Liberty60
Asa member of my local Dem Central Committee, I can attest that the rank and file here are oout for blood- when we elected delegates to the state convention, there wasnt any of the “Third Way” talk or triangulating, or even any talk of rebranding- there was just bold clear statements of class warfare by the 2%ers and their GOP cronies.
And, funnily enough, here in California we swept the state offices.
In political struggles, there is a time for conciliation, compromise, strategic shifts to the center…
But this isnt one of those times.
Liberty60
@Catsy:
and yeah, you nailed it.
OzoneR
@Liberty60:
there never is during election time