I guess that is one similiarity to 1993.,... (4.00 / 8)

We got crushed in 1994 'cos we got stabbed in the back from our own.

This is why Obama went so big on the budget.... he knew it would get whittled down.  He learned form the stimulus mistake.

And we have Nancy in the house, who is actively corralling her blue dogs as best she can to get the most liberal bill out there to be able to better negotiate in committee...

It's irritating that we have so many potential turncoats in the Senate... You'd never see Republicans do this...  What's even more irritating is that we don't have any good primary challengers for Conrad and Nelson to straighten them out...

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

---

by: lord_mike @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 12:40:15 PM UTC

I agree with you to a point (4.00 / 2)

The problem is that we have a very weak Senate majority leader. I always believed that Hillary Clinton would have been a kick ass majority leader in the Senate because she would have sought revenge for those dems that wouldn't go along and made their lives miserable. With a bit of direction from the White House she would have been powerful and this type of crap wouldn't be happening.

Harry Reid is to blame for the mess of a Senate.

---

by: oak tree @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 18:11:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Necessary Reaction (4.00 / 1)

All of them should receive not primary but third party challenges, along the lines Sirota discussed here:

http://www.openleft.com/showDi...

If this means, in some instances, Republicans taking their seats, this is a price we can now afford to pay since a continuing Democrat majority is now pretty much assured.  In short, we don't need them anymore.

What is significant about these challenges is the individual cost that they will impose and the message that they will send.

To New, DLC and Blue Dog Dems who play footsie with the right in exchange for corporate cash:

The jig is up guys.

The time to begin building the infrastructure to support these challenges is now.

---

by: John Halle @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 12:40:53 PM UTC

Their must be a price (0.00 / 0)

to betraying America.

No better than Bush.

Guess who the independant is?  Lieberman.

We are facing a depression and we no longer can afford these people who seek to harm Americans for their destructive ideology.

That's the reality.  And Democrat following Rush must be defeated.  

---

by: Tom Wells @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 15:02:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

ideology (4.00 / 2)

It is exactly ideology. I know it's been written before but this is ideology masked as "centrism". In news articles over and over they just label folks like this "centrist democrats" or a group of "moderate democrats." What does that even mean? There isn't anything "moderate" or "centrist" about them. They are reflexively attacking the budget and other spending bills with no sense of the mood of the country. They obviously don't look at polls so to whom are they "centrist" or "moderate"?

---

by: jstrick @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 15:31:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree (0.00 / 0)

You find out who these 14 turncoats are, you pick the weak ones off with either a primary challenge or an independent candidate.  And you do it in a very loud and public way so that everyone knows why it is happening.  If you can snipe off even one or two, the others will run for cover and knock this crap off.

I would say that having Conn. run a special recall election for Leiberman is not out of the question.  He is the weakest and has blatantly not honored his election pledges.  To have a Gray Davis style recall to pull that guy out mid-term (if such a thing is possible for a US senator?) or at least have a no confidence vote on the jackass.  He is the easiest one to replace, why not do it in a very visible way - the progressives claim Leiberman's head?

---

by: zot2323 @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 16:09:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Attack of the BlueDawgs! (0.00 / 0)

This sher blows the whole '60 votes' thing right out the ass, donnit?

I suppose it would be rude of me to remind folks that I (not alone, of course), have been predicting this situation since LAST YEAR?

Fuck it.

Doncha love your 'liberal' party?

---

by: konopelli @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 13:08:00 PM UTC

60 isn't needed for the budget (0.00 / 0)

Which is huge because many of these "moderates" are largely fighting the spending battle. Once that's waged with the budget, I think they'll be much more reasonable with actual legislation of healthcare, financial regulation, and climate change. Particularly senators like Bob Casey, Claire McCaskill, who are close to the President and huge supporters. That being said, I think it's safe to say that 2 Senators who will be a thorn in Obama's agenda are Nelson and, to a lesser extent, Bayh.

---

by: ai002h @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 16:51:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Who are they? (4.00 / 6)

These Democrats who are meeting behind closed doors. I'd like to know their names and the states they represent. I'm sure all the major progressive organizations including the AFL/CIO, NARAL, etc. would like to know as well.

---

by: Michael Harold @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 13:16:32 PM UTC

they need a standing caucus (0.00 / 0)

like the blue dogs/new dems in the house so it's easy to identify them.  These constant ad hoc gangs of moderates are too unpredictable.  I'm not surprised when Ben Nelson sells out, but the Sr. Senator from Minnesota?  WTF!  If they would just get organized it would cut down on these stabbed-in-the-back feelings I keep having.

That said, the Stimulus Bill Blue Dogs started off as a large group that seemed to convene largely for the purpose of determining who the 59th-61st most liberal senators were on that issue.  Once so identified, the rest of the group went home while the median+10 group of senators used their powers of ideological incoherence to get their way.

Presumably this will go similarly, with the only drama being which senator gets to be the one in the hot seat.  I'm gonna go ahead and say that this time it will be...drum roll please...Ben Nelson.

---

by: ahkiam @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 13:51:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

2010 is not a presidential year (4.00 / 1)

I am happy to put up my campaign $$$ to make sure that legit 3rd party candidates (even Ross Perot or Ron Paul types) get a chance to attack the Blue Dogs -- even if it means we lose a few Nelsons in the process to Republicans...

---

by: elhuevon @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 14:05:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Read the article (0.00 / 0)

Evan Bayh
Ben Nelson
Mary Landrieu
Mark Warner
Bill Nelson
Amy Klobuchar
Mark Pryor
Jeanne Shaheen
Robert P. Casey Jr.
Blanche L. Lincoln
Joseph I. Lieberman
Claire McCaskill
Mark Begich

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power

---

by: Populista @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 19:36:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

OTOH (4.00 / 4)

Not only does it irriatI don't know why these Senators get to be called "moderates," given that President Obama's spending proposals are wildly popular. Given current popular opinion, either these Senators are actually right-wing, or about 60% of the country is now to the left of moderates.

If this is still a "center-right country" then these guys are clearly rightwingers.

How dare Obama try to save the country, much less the planet, anyway?  

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 13:58:25 PM UTC

Some might call it treason. (4.00 / 2)

These so called "moderates" seek to harm American workers.

It is only through massive deficit spending that we can pull out of depression.  They think they can party like it's 1997 and bubbles go on forever.

It's over for them.

---

by: Tom Wells @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 15:04:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Did you see Evan Bayh's statement? (4.00 / 5)

About "the American people are belt-tightening right now, so government needs to as well..."?  Obviously, since this is not a minor recession, government has to expand its fiscal policy to counter (although it can probably never completely match) the belt-tightening of consumers. I'm assuming he voted for the stimulus?

Bayh reminds me of that scene in The Last Hurrah, where the banker's son is awarded Chief of the Fire Department. Geez.

You know, I don't expect these guys to be a rubber stamp. If you've got a strong case for altering the budget this way or that, then make it. I myself had some issues with the way some fellow progressives were building the stimulus package.

But these guys aren't making such a case (Nelson lost all credibility on Maddow, when she pointed out the obvious fact that his impact on the stimulus bill was to dramatically weaken it, and he couldn't answer her...he just fell back on vague election slogans).

 

---

by: glacierpeaks @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 14:18:07 PM UTC

Bayh thinks it (4.00 / 4)

is the 1990s.

The politicians are sheltered and do not realize we are in a depression.

They just repeat empty slogans of old.

---

by: Tom Wells @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 15:05:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Call what Bayh suggests (4.00 / 3)

by its real name: Hooverism.

---

by: Tom Wells @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 15:05:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I keep catch myself thinking that we really (4.00 / 6)

need a functioning, intelligent, critical, reality-based conservative party in this country to function as the loyal opposition.

Then I remember: We really need a functioning, intelligent, critical, reality-based liberal party in this country to function as the loyal opposition.

The Democratic Party's actually done a fantastic job transforming into a centrist party, with a tent extending from Kennedy to Nelson, Kucinich to Shuler. And that's great, in many ways, except that right now the only intelligent, reality-based conservative opposition to the center of the Democratic Party comes from the right wing of the Democratic Party.

And the only response that makes sense to me is still encouraging the formation of a progressive group of legislators who are willing--and at first eager--to throw out the baby with the bathwater. In the short-term, that'll look stupid and damaging, but I'm not sure what other long-term strategy will shift the center of this, our centrist party, toward the center of our center-left country.

---

by: Joel @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 14:18:54 PM UTC

Oh, and Chris? (0.00 / 0)

theconcerntroll.com is available.

---

by: Joel @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 14:41:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

as is (0.00 / 0)

thepathetico.com  

not everything worth doing is profitable. not everything profitable is worth doing.

---

by: tatere @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 15:19:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A show of force through the biggest fu**ing petition -EVER? (0.00 / 0)

My take, which I've repeated in a variety of posts, is that McAulife and Emanuel used their pro-business donors to stuff our Congress with Representatives with hidden agendas.
From the inside they grew to eventually clog the Democrats arteries.  

I don't believe it's the "Democrats" who've changed.  Like Markos of KOS once said, it's the duty of the remaining true-blood Democrats to stand up and take charge -once again.

Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.

---

by: worldlymother @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 17:13:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I know it's an obvious statement (0.00 / 0)

but it's long past time to start treating these Blue Dogs like Republicans

---

by: Helzapoppin @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 15:38:45 PM UTC

Where's the fu**ing outrage by the rest of them , then?? (0.00 / 0)

The two Republican Senators from Mississippi are getting a combined total of just under ONE BILLION dollars.

You tell me who allowed them to get away with that in a supposedly Democratic run Senate?  What does Mississippi have on old Harry Reid and old Daniel Inouye?  Oh,that's it...they're TOO OLD and can't pick their balls up off the floor and actually LEAD.

The 'moderates' are nothing more than the usual hard line pigs squealing to hide their own dirty hands and feet.  

But it is not coincidental that those same squealing pigs elected Harry Reid, again, a demented version of the word "leader', who leaves the country with a crippled third branch who can do nothing to stop them.  

Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.

---

by: worldlymother @ Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 16:17:01 PM UTC

Democrats in Opposition (0.00 / 0)

The only thing I am concerned here is that Obama so far is allowing Pork Barrel spending bill from the Bush Administration to go unchecked. Obama campaigned against it, but he is embracing it by promising to sign the bill. In fact, I just even raised this alarm about some wasteful $20M Earmarks in an Army Program for Fort Leonard Wood Program, in Missouri, but nobody cares about it. I even complained about this Fort Leonard Wood Program wasteful spending to Obama Transition Team last year, but nothing has changed.  The same old business as usual is happening.

So, if some Democrats will join hands with Senate GOP to oppose Obama on this issue, I am all for it.  

---

by: kofinsoyameye @ Thu Mar 05, 2009 at 00:03:49 AM UTC