This is driving me crazy (0.00 / 0)

Sorry to be a nit-picker on grammar but it's "bloc" not "block", assuming you are referring to a political faction intended to vote as one.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

---

by: Anthony de Jesus @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 13:42:00 PM UTC

Actually, It's "Bloq" (4.00 / 1)

What?  It's not?

Well, it should be!

"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 @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 13:55:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Its a play on words (0.00 / 0)

Referring to both a political faction and to the desired action: blocking legislation until certain demands are met.

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 15:42:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm So Glad Obama's President (4.00 / 3)

In the 90s, Bill Clinton took a centrist approach to policy reform, and centrist Dems killed it, and the punditalkcrazy consigned itself to irrelevancy.  If Hillary had been elected, a replay seemed virtually a foregone conclusion.

But with Obama, we get a millisecond of shock before we realize we're getting the exact same thing.

And the punditalkcrazy consigns itself to irrelevancy.  

"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 @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 13:53:20 PM UTC

Obama's Mistake (4.00 / 1)

Obama's mistake has been to leave this to Congress--who is blowing this big time.  

---

by: setb @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 14:04:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's what he gets for trying to hard to avoid Hillary's failures. (4.00 / 1)

Yup, Obama seems to do the exact opposite of what Hillary did. Should anyone be surprised that this doesn't work, either?

Really, for a guy who seems so determined to find his own, middle of the road, way, his failure to understand that simply trying the other extremum is misguided, is really astounding. Should be common sense that the the best strategy in this case really is finding the right mixture between both approaches!
:-/

---

by: Gray @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 14:49:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

His mistake (0.00 / 0)

has been giving no sign that he really gives a shit about the outcome.

If he wants a healthcare bill, he needs to use the bully pulpit more. And if he wants a good one, he needs to threaten to veto any bad one.

Except it's unclear if it really is a mistake, or if he just wants a band-aid for reform.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

---

by: Englishlefty @ Tue Jun 23, 2009 at 01:45:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ineffective Democratic Leadership (4.00 / 3)

This includes the DNC (state parties), DSCC/DCCC (Congressional Leaders), and, surprisingly, the Obama campaign remnant (OFA).

As far as I can tell -- State Democratic Executive Committeeman, TX-SD 13 -- all of the above are ever so busy transitioning from ineffectual "targeted campaign" mode (Clintonism) to race-based lobbying (feckless pleading for bi-partisan support on particular issues from special-interest groups).

This is mostly personal job-hunting in or around elected office-holders, with a huge queue of Obama administration office-seekers jammed up in Congress, where the GOP can obstruct with impunity.

Yes, the GOP is self-marginalizing right now, but the Hold Harmless Democrats are a self-liquidating rabble.

That is exactly what the GOP can run against in 2010 as in 1994. "Change We Can Believe In" can quickly turn to the sort of ultra-low political participation rates that might allow the GOP to "sweep" back into power or, at least, to panic the already undisciplined Democrats.

This fits the following observation:

"In the United States, though power corrupts, the expectation of power paralyzes."

Galbraith, John Kenneth on Power

While the GOP opposes the President's program, Democrats are actually damaging it.

::JRBehrman

---

by: JRBehrman0 @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 14:32:05 PM UTC

To pass progressive legislation... (4.00 / 5)

... we have to take back the White House, we have to take back the Senate, and we have to take back the House.

I am in earnest -- I will not equivocate -- I will not excuse -- I will not retreat a single inch -- AND I WILL BE HEARD.  

---

by: lambert @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 14:49:51 PM UTC

So, what do you want to do about Romm? (4.00 / 1)

Unless they are scrubbing the comments, I notice no one posted any negative comments (so far) complaining that Romm is wasting time writing a Father's Day post with a picture of his kid.  Should progressives carpet-bomb the comments at Climate Progress in an attempt to bully Romm into action?

Should email be sent to climate@americanprogressaction.org, the address listed on the website?  The site also lists the email address Jromm@americanprogress.org.

Do you want to establish a blacklist of nominally liberal punditocracy books and try to direct people to neither buy nor read Romm's book that has a prominent ad on the website unless he "behaves"?

People always want to organize campaigns to write/call the offices of politicians in order to sway them.  If part of the problem is advocacy groups being a bunch of weenies, then maybe we should harass them until they improve or quit or go into an online meltdown that we can all laugh at.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

---

by: Anthony de Jesus @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 14:52:54 PM UTC

Brother, you've got that right. (4.00 / 1)

 I agree with the assessment. Conservative Dems and timid leadership are two huge obstacles for any progressive agenda. The Republicans, by themselves, are nothing more than a sideshow. They can go on FOX and get therapy with Hannity and Beck.
If we don't get a public option for health care ...never mind a single-payer option... it won't be because of the Republicans. It will be on the Dems.
If we don't get some meaningful environmental protections, it won't be because of the Republicans. It will be on the Dems.
 That said, most people haven't seemed to have caught on to what, exactly, President Obama is doing. In terms of the way our govt. is supposed to work, congress is supposed to do its job rather than just pass presidential edicts. They're supposed to show up for work, work through the process and deliver service to the American people. President Obama is trying to make congress get in the habit of doing its part ..and its slow going. There are many long-established collective bad habits to remedy ...and it could really take a generation, but at least we've started. The rest of it is up to us. We have to rail our reps hard. I live in Alabama, and so the fight is almost futile for me. I have a stack of letters from Sessions and Shelby that usually end with the words, "though we don't agree on this issue, I appreciate you sharing your concerns..." Still, I have the letters and maybe if more of my neighbors had stacks of these letters we'd start to see their content change. That's the only kind of change that we can all believe in, when we're doing our share.

---

by: alamantra @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 15:00:22 PM UTC

Do you have any evidence for this? (4.00 / 2)

Alamantra, you write:

President Obama is trying to make congress get in the habit of doing its part ...

A (post-election, governing) quote with a link would be nice -- the humidity from all the rain up here has caused the circuitry in my telepathic helmet to fail.

I am in earnest -- I will not equivocate -- I will not excuse -- I will not retreat a single inch -- AND I WILL BE HEARD.  

---

by: lambert @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 16:26:00 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I Agree. (4.00 / 2)

The Democrats have control of the white house and Congress.  We understand the Democrats inherited a disastrous situation from Bush, not of the Democrats' making.  And we do not expect miracles.

But let's ask what we reasonably could expect from the Democrats during the first six months that they have complete control of the federal government.  I would include the following at a minimum:

1.  Begin to end the wars, wind them down, try to get international or other groups involved in conducting peace negotiations and re-building programs, to be funded by the U.S., for the devastation we have caused.  

We've seen the opposite.  Obama has committed to keeping an occupying military force in Iraq for at least 10 years, he has started a war against Pakistan (without the vote of Congress, as constitutionally required) by launching a stream of attacks against its people, he has begun escalating the war in Afghanistan and trying to train a standing military of 240,000 people apparently to protect the Oil Corporation pipelines that is planned, he is continuing the Bush policies of sending in special forces and millions of dollars to Iran to try to overthrow that country.  So much for Peace Now.

2.  Prosecute:  war crimes, torture, financial crimes.

We've seen the opposite.  The Democrats refuse to prosecute.  I saw Eric Holder being questioned by Russ Feingold last week.  It was like watching a BB shot into a metal barrel full of Wesson Oil:  he bounced, he skirted, he lept, he jumped, he evaded.  The question asked by Sen. Feingold?  Didn't Eric Holder, the AG, agree that the warrentless wiretaps from the Bush administration were illegal?  Holder simply refused to answer.  He said they may have been "unwise."  It was contemptuous of him.  And he showed himself to be a liar and a conman.  Of course they were illegal.  And of course the Democrats refuse to do anything to bring this out, so the public can find out if our rights were invaded.  And so we can find out which Democratic politicians were wiretapped, and what information is being held or used by somebody to blackmail them.  Like the Harman dirt, for example.

3.  Prosecute:  financial crimes.

We've seen the opposite.  The biggest baddest sleaziest creeps from Wall Street were brought in by Obama and given complete control over our Treasury.  Billions of dollars of taxpayer money has been handed over to these criminals.  No prosecutions, no investigations, no tracing or seizing or assets.  They get bonuses, the public gets screwed.

4.  Jobs programs.

Nothing.

5.  Housing assistance.

Such as help with foreclosure.  A few pennies and a PR job, but really nothing.  

6.  Environmental/Global Warming.

Nothing.  Propaganda, nonsense, but nothing has been done substantively on this issue.  

Do we need a Supreme Leader to give direction to the most corrupt politicians in the world, the Congress, by dollar amount of bribes accepted.  "Our" politicians.  Crooks.  

What part of "sea-rising" do they not understand?

We need to get off of oil.  Everybody with half a brain understands that.  How do we accomplish it?  Not by continuing wars to steal oil from other countries.  By wind, solar, and a massive investment in R&D for non-oil-based energy sources.  Where's that program, Democrats?  Quite simply, the Oil Corporations will pay enormous bribes to prevent any public investment in a new green society.  

The Democrats are following a program written by the corporations.  They may be "nicer" than the Republicans, but the program is the same.  No Change.  

---

by: NABNYC @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 17:01:07 PM UTC

So, Chris, have you e-mailed Joe? (4.00 / 1)

Invite him to do a "right to respond" piece. Or you could go to his blog and put a comment in the threads. I did so on one of your articles a while back and he responded pretty quickly.

Because I'm assuming that all of you progressive movement bloggers talk to each other on occasion, right?

---

by: NC 11 CD @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 18:23:01 PM UTC

Not the Weather Dominators (4.00 / 1)

Since Collin Peterson seems so intent on blowing things up, you should call his bloc the Weather Underground.

The Crolian Progressive: as great an adventure as ever I heard of...

---

by: Nonpartisan @ Mon Jun 22, 2009 at 18:50:31 PM UTC