We previously discussed the disconnect between Democratic leaders and liberal voters in the increasing complaints of leaders like Vice President Biden over Democratic “lethargy.” Democrats in Washington once again seemed shocked that voters are not eager to fight for their retention. Now, Biden has added the helpful advice to Democratic voters to “stop whining” about things that they did not get in Washington and to “buck up.”
The “buck up” comment was meant as an improvement over the “whining” comment. It turned out that “whining” was not greeted by voters as an improvement over “lethargy.”
Here is the latest statement:
“And so those who don’t get — didn’t get everything they wanted, it’s time to just buck up here, understand that we can make things better, continue to move forward and — but not yield the playing field to those folks who are against everything that we stand for in terms of the initiatives we put forward.”
By “everything [we] wanted,” I assume Biden is including the fulfillment of our treaty obligations to investigate and prosecute war crimes such as torture — which the Administration blocked.
I assume it includes removing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, which the Administration is trying to preserve by asking a court not to impose a national injunction freezing the policy.
I assume it includes allowing dozens of privacy lawsuits to go forward against companies, which the Administration blocked despite evidence of unlawful surveillance by the Bush Administration.
I assume it includes allowing torture victims to seek review in federal court, which the Administration has successfully blocked.
I assume it includes protecting pristine areas along the East Coast from drilling, which the Administration has fought to open up for development even after the BP accident.
I assume it includes reducing the faith-based programs of the Bush Administration which raised concerns over the separation of church and state, which Obama expanded.
Well, it includes a lot of things that democratic and independent voters wanted. What they got was a Democratic majority saw power as the end to itself rather than the means to fight for principle. For civil libertarians, “those folks who are against everything that we stand” include the Obama Administration which has been a perfect nightmare in the adoption and expansion of Bush policies.
Yet, Biden wants civil libertarians, environmentalists, and liberals to stop whining and buck up. The Administration made a cynical calculation that liberals and civil libertarians and environmentalists have no where to go and that they have to support the Democrats regardless of these obnoxious policies. Now, they are simply shocked that voters are not enthusiastic about their continuing in power.
The Democratic leadership has conveyed that the only principle that they are committed to is their retention of power. All other principles — torture, the environment, privacy, free speech — are immaterial to that one overriding goal. They just do not understand why everyone does not see it that way.
Well, I am one of those whining, lethargic voters and I cannot get myself to buck up to support leaders who turned their back on such core values. Perhaps if enough Democrats are replaced, the party may rediscover the benefit of being principled and standing for something other than their own insular interests. They need to actually represent something other than “we are not as bad as those guys.” The problem for voters is that, by retaining these leaders, we reaffirm that they cynical calculation by the White House was correct. There is no reason why Democrats should fulfill their commitments in these areas if voters do not hold them accountable. I know some on this blog may disagree, but I personally think I will stick with the whining for now.
Source: Real Clear Politics
SwM,
“I now look at this election kind of like defending one’s borders” … yep, and I’m going to add … take no prisoners!
Tony C.
I don’t know how long you’ve been posting here, I’ve only been on the site about a year … but I have learned some things:
We don’t always agree with JT and say so
Elaine and SwM are not the least thin-skinned but you would be wise to take their postings seriously and argue with them on the subject matter at hand without off-hand comments
Buddha cut you a lot of slack at the beginning for your position had much in common with his thoughts …
Great post, Blouise. I now look at this election kind of like defending one’s borders. There is a massive amount of money wanting to over run the little bit of progress we have made since Bush left. We know Rove is in this in a major way. The Swift Boaters are in it. My problem with your position, Tony C, is that it aids the enemy.
My computer is acting strangely on all sites. Here, posts appear and disappear and then reappear. If somebody has addressed something to me and I haven’t answered it’s due to this irritating phenomena … hope this posts
Tony C.
While I agree with much of what you posit, your demeaning replies to intelligent people are parochial and exhibit what I consider an evident character flaw. Please consider more collegial responses and let the readers decide the merits of your arguments instead of your oft-inept display of supposed self-important posturing.
I spent a great deal of time pondering all the different arguments put forward and reading every single link posted (whew) before coming to a decision.
Tony, if you had a plan to put in place, someway to gradually fill the vacuum as it developed then I would find your idea more workable. A viable third party perhaps that developed from a local level and worked its way up to finally being able to field a national candidate … the wording for a law that would make much of what is happening today illegal or even a Constitutional amendment that would begin at the local level and work its way up the food chain. Something constructive that we could debate, change, expand to replace the wild-west lawlessness that is our campaign funding today … I would be more inclined to follow the plan you put forth.
Without such a plan I believe we would be putting our democracy in permanent harms way and those looking to take our country back to a political stone-age … the Koch’s and their minions (people out there we haven’t even heard of yet)would gobble it all up and fill the vacuum we unwittingly created.
Correction:
Blouise,
Tony may not call people who disagree with him tea party trolls or McCain sympathizers–he will, however, denigrate them…insult their intelligence…put words in their mouths…tell them they’re using flawed logic…
**********
Sorry for being redundant in my previous comment. My computer is with the Geek Squad at the moment. I have to borrow my husband’s MacBook when he’s not using it. Thus, my haste in typing my previous comment.
I hope I’ll get my computer back soon.
Blouise,
Tony may not call people who disagree with him tea party trolls or McCain sympathizers for disagreeing with him–he will, however, denigrate them…insult their intelligence…put words in their mouths…tell them they’re using flawed logic…
Tony C I have never called you a troll. Others have. Prof Turley does not tell people to stay home nor does he tell them how to vote.
@Blouise: Perhaps that is true and I can stand disagreement. I don’t start calling people tea party trolls and McCain sympathizers for disagreeing with me.
Swarthmore mom,
October 20, 2010
Wisconsin Voters: Republican Ron Johnson Has NO Plans To Bring Jobs; Shrugs Them Off
By Nicole Belle
http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/wisconsin-voters-republican-ron-johns
Excerpt:
Russ Feingold has been in an inexplicably tough race with Ron Johnson for the Wisconsin junior Senate seat. But the more Ron Johnson opens his mouth, the clearer it is that Johnson’s campaign is built on a single idea and it isn’t benefiting most Wisconsin citizens.
Wisconsin residents are exceptionally lucky that the statewide unemployment rate is lower than the national average, so perhaps it wasn’t as high a priority for Republican challenger Ron Johnson to form a coherent jobs plan. In this meeting with the editorial board of the Green Bay Press Gazette, Johnson was asked about his plan to bring more jobs to Wisconsin and he shifted to the standard talking points of cutting spending. When it was pointed out to him that he had yet to speak to jobs specifically, Johnson’s response was to merely shrug it off, an ironic gesture from a man whose self-styled campaign was to insist as a successful business man, he knew how to create jobs.
As Steve Benen says, Johnson is extremely lucky he’s being overshadowed by other extremist candidates. That’s why his casual dismissal of his lack of jobs and his rather frightening plans for America don’t get noticed.
Tony C,
SwM makes far more sense than your plan which would leave us all wide open to the Koch conspiracy. I can understand where you are coming from but following your line of reasoning guarantees a vacuum into which the Koch conspiracy will flow … too risky.
@SM: McCain is a liar, a cheater, a hypocrite, a homophobe, a corrupt criminal. His thought processes and mine have nothing in common, I am sure.
Answer the question. How does my position differ from Dr. Turley’s position, other than that I disagree with him on Citizen’s United (so I presume Dr. Turley actually **supports** the free speech right of the Koch brothers to spend hundreds of millions of their own dollars advocating their far right agenda).
He says at the top of this page, and I quote:
“Well, I am one of those whining, lethargic voters and I cannot get myself to buck up to support leaders who turned their back on such core values. Perhaps if enough Democrats are replaced, the party may rediscover the benefit of being principled and standing for something other than their own insular interests.”
I agree with Dr. Turley, you disagree with him.
He says, *** “Perhaps if enough Democrats are replaced” ***. If that isn’t a call for punishment, I don’t know what is.
Now why, exactly, am I accused of being a naive, dumbass, closeted Tea Partier McCain sympathizing troll, and Dr. Turley is not painted with the same brush? Precisely what have I said here that warrants this disparity in judgment?
Swarthmore mom,
Let’s hope Democrats in Wisconsin don’t vote for Feingold in November so Republican Ron Johnson can elected to the Senate. Right?
*****
From TPMDC (10/21/2010)
Ron Johnson On Homeless Vets: This Election Isn’t About Details [VIDEO]
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/ron-johnson-on-homeless-vets-this-election-isnt-about-details.php?ref=fpb
Excerpt:
Wisconsin’s Republican Senate hopeful Ron Johnson got tripped up on a point of policy during a recent interview: Asked what the Department of Veteran’s Affairs’ responsibility is to homeless veterans, Johnson declared that his election fight against Sen. Russ Feingold is not “about details.”
“Certainly the people that step up to the plate to answer that call — they are a top priority in terms of spending. So we do need a strong VA system. We need to support those folks as long as they need support,” Johnson said.
The moderator pressed Johnson — a government skeptic — to explain exactly how the government should respond to the issue of homeless vets. “Are there specific things that you think need to happen within that galaxy of services, perhaps, that the VA has some responsibility for or other organizations that would help homeless veterans?”
Johnson responded, flummoxed.
“Specifically I can’t really — I haven’t been there, I don’t have all the details. One thing I will point out: I don’t believe this election really is about details. It just isn’t. I mean as I’ve gone through the state of Wisconsin I’ve viewed this pretty much as a job interview…. I’ll have to get there. I’ll have to start performing the job.”
Tony C Now you are a victim? I am not frustrated with you at all. I would never try to change your mind. I only respond to you to illustrate the shortcomings of your simplistic statements. I guess you should have voted for McCain. His thought processes and your are simpatico.
@SM: You do not seem interested in logic or argument, only compliance with your position. You have stopped debating me or providing evidence (which I will note has worked before) and started calling me names instead, probably out of frustration.
I apologize for frustrating you, I truly sympathize with your fear, including those I think are unjustified: Fear is fear. But I will not apologize for calling criminals what they are, no matter what they claim or pretend to support on my behalf. Actions speak louder than words and their actions and results are deafening.
Is Dr. Turley a closet Tea Partier? Do you doubt he voted for Obama? I haven’t heard him say so explicitly, but I assume he did, as I did. I am capable of making grievous errors, and I am capable of admitting them, and I made a mistake with Obama. I was conned.
Tony C I doubt you voted for Obama.
@SM: I do not know of one; that wasn’t my claim. My claim is they are religious elitist bigots and will buy anybody or do anything it takes. The reason the Republicans do what they do is because that is where the Koch money is (along with other rich).
The fact that one bad guy is at war with another bad guy does not make one of them (Obama) a good guy. Obama is still a bad guy, for all of the reasons I have detailed, and Dr. Turley has detailed, and Glenn Greenwald has detailed, and even Buddha has mentioned or alluded to in his comments (on this comment thread and others).
Obama conned me. The Democrats I voted for and gave money to all helped him do it. Just as Turley noted above, it isn’t that I “didn’t get everything I wanted,” it is that I didn’t get ANYTHING I wanted, and in fact on civil rights and most economic issues I got the exact opposite of what was explicitly promised to me in the campaign, and WAS what I wanted and expected.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer An article about the billionaire Koch brothers and their war against Obama.
Tony C Give me the name of one democrat that the Koch Brothers support.