It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dumb Dems Let the GOP Run Wild

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 11:03 AM
link   
I don't know how many articles I've seen regarding what is wrong with today's Democratic party. Maybe they're not doing what they've done historically.. look out for the little guy. If they'd collectively grow a pair and start holding the administration and Republicans accountable for their abysmal policies, they might win back some support. It ain't brain surgery.




Dumb Dems Let GOP Run Wild
By Molly Ivins
AlterNet

Thursday 28 April 2005

Being of the populist persuasion, I am a terminal fan of Thomas Frank, who has gone from "What's the Matter With Kansas?" to "What's the Matter With Liberals?" in the current issue of the New York Review of Books, which is a good spot for it.

Those of us in the beer-drinking, pick-up-truck-driving, country-music-listening school of liberals in the hinterlands particularly appreciate his keen dissection of how the Republicans use class resentment against "elitist liberals," while waging class warfare on people who work for a living.

The unholy combination of theocracy and plutocracy that now rules this country is, in fact, enabled by dumb liberals. Many a weary liberal on the Internet and elsewhere has been involved in the tedious study of the entrails from the last election, trying to figure out where Democrats went wrong. I don't have a dog in that fight, but I can guarantee you where they're going wrong for the next election: 73 Democratic House members and 18 Democratic senators voted for that hideous bankruptcy "reform" bill that absolutely screws regular people.

And it's not just consumers who were screwed by the lobbyist-written bill. The Wall Street Journal shows small businesses are also getting the shaft, as the finance industry charges them higher and higher transaction fees. If Democrats aren't going to stand up for regular people, to hell with them.
www.truthout.org...




posted on May, 1 2005 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I am thinking the exact opposite. Republicans are winning elections and destroying Democrat ideology. But there are some weak Republicans (moderates) who don't want to put the Dems out of their misery.

Democrats have done enough hating, it is time for them to come up with some original ideas.

Believe me the frustration is on both sides. Republicans need to "collectively grow a pair" and keep doing what is right for this country and stop being afraid of what dems think.



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 09:44 PM
link   
The US is a two party system, having one disfunctional sets the entire system off kilter.

I think that the dems are staying quite, like with schiavo, because they want to 'reserve' everything for the elections. Of course, thats not until 2008.

They're not going to do anything controversial until around then, not take any stances that can backfire, until then when they can make issues out of it.

I don't know if this is something that Dean is urging or other people in the party.

You've got to think about it tho, Kerry nearly won the election, even tho he was the 'wrong candidate' (ie perceived as ineffectual, indecisive, and weak). THere's a public out there ready to vote democratic. The candidate for 2008 is going to have to be someone that they can front as being 'strong, with leadership' characteristics, and the party might start doing that sort of thing for the congressional elections too.

This might result in a revival of Party Platforms being meaningful, since I doubt that the dems are going to be able to find new candidates and revamp everyone.

However I think that that woudl be a mistake. Kerry and Edwards were at their strongest because they could push that 'two americas' idea. they could tap into that idea of not giving in to a culture of fear and paranoia. While kerry and edwards could be talking about moving forward while still agressively responding to terrorism, bush and cheney were somewhat goulishly (however accurately it may have been) reminding people that attacks and death were comming. One party pushed hope, the other pushed fear and agressive response to that fear.

Obviously the people overall went with that fear and agression idea. But if the dems are going to come back into control, or, really, be a strong second party, they're going to have to do more of that, otherwise they'll just overlap with the republicans.



 
0

log in

join