• Site changes

    Site will be down for an hour overnight (Mon/Tue) for an hour, some significant "behind the scenes" server changes happening. If all goes well, you'll see nothing different tomorrow except for faster speed and encrypted connections (HTTPS). Not sure of exact timing.

Home Main Forums General Discussion Democrats:"a long way down the road by not drawing bright lines in the sand"

  • madfloridian (1370 posts)
    Profile photo of madfloridian Donor

    Democrats:"a long way down the road by not drawing bright lines in the sand"

    I just love to keep old articles because I can go back and see patterns.  That way I can see that the Democrats have been avoiding tough choices for years.

    I was furious with the party and at David Axelrod for saying these words.

    Look, we have gotten a long way down the road by not drawing bright lines in the sand

    Moderator David Gregory followed up: “When it comes to a public plan, though, no ultimatums from the president?”

    “Well, the president believes strongly in a public choice, and he has made that very, very clear,” Axelrod replied. “He has made that clear privately. He has made that clear publicly, and we’re going to continue to do so. … Look, we have gotten a long way down the road by not drawing bright lines in the sand — other than on the major points, which is that we can’t add to the deficit with this health care reform, so it has to be paid for, it has to reduce costs, and we want to make sure that all Americans have quality, affordable health care.

    In other words the president was not going to take a strong stand.

    “Those are the things that have to be accomplished. People have different ideas. We’re willing to listen to those ideas. But … those are the imperatives that we have. … He won’t sign a bill that does not meet those. … I think the president wants a robust public option.”

    “The bill will be bipartisan by definition,” he said. “The Senate health committee accepted 82 Republican amendments. Republican ideas will be included with this process; we hope it will come with Republican votes as well.”

    Host George Stephanopoulos said, “That seems to be the new White House definition of bipartisanship.”

    Axelrod answered: “I don’t think we should get consumed by process at a time when health care costs … doubled in this decade. Ultimately, we’ll bring the federal budget down. We have to act. We can’t afford to get consumed in these types of Washington discussions.”

    That article is from 2009 at Politico.  There was already a pattern emerging.  Bipartisanship was more important that bright lines in the sand.

    The Democrats have avoided those bright lines for years now.  And even though they have lost all power they are still planning on following this path of not taking stands.

    About the same time Bill Clinton was urging them to get busy and pass something. Anything, since they had the majority for a short time back then.  He as much as said not to be too picky.

    Bill Clinton Urges Fast Action by Senate Democrats

    Former President Bill Clinton joined Senate Democrats for their weekly luncheon on Tuesday and urged them to band together and quickly pass health care legislation.

    Senators said Mr. Clinton did not drill down into minute policy details, often a favorite pastime, and instead stuck to the big picture, urging lawmakers to get the bill adopted.

    Clinton’s own words.

    So its not important to be perfect here. It’s important to act, to move to start the ball rolling, to claim the evident advantages that all these plans agree with. And whatever they can get the votes for, I’m going to support.

    We could have tried for so much more.

    There really have been no “bright line” stands taken by our party for years.   And this last election those of us who had the nerve to demand such stances were not just ignored.  We were actively scorned and demeaned.

    Seems like the party has gone from refusing to take stands to actually openly pushing out those of us who want them.

    The general consensus for going along to get along was that we might lose to the feistier Republicans.

    Well, guess what. We lost anyway.

    And along came Bernie who was drawing all kinds of bright lines.  He became immensely popular.   Even in  my heavily Republican area the Republicans love Bernie.  Many would have gladly voted for him instead of Trump.

    But the party that never draws bright lines….finally decided to draw a very bright and clear one.  They made sure Bernie would not win the primary.

    Pastiche, joentokyo, WillyT and 25 othersBaba OhReally, pa28, snot, jwirr, 3FingerBrown, Ohio Barbarian, 99thMonkey, graycat, OzoneTom, Haikugal, Betty Karlson, Xyzse, Doremus Jessup, Jefferson23, canoeist52, A little weird, Two way street, xynthee, Enthusiast, area woman, Grateful Curd, PADemD, jdpriestly, Entrepreneur, gordyfl like this
    If a person is required to be loyal to a political party and not question their stands on issues, then any semblance of real truth is lost. https://twitter.com/madfloridian

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

▼ Hide Reply Index
11 replies
  • Entrepreneur (1429 posts)
    Profile photo of Entrepreneur Donor

    1. "not drawing bright lines in the sand", also known as "having a public

    position and a private position”, one to get the votes and the other to get the money.

    No longer GoneFishin.  Truth is I've never GoneFishin.
    • madfloridian (1370 posts)
      Profile photo of madfloridian Donor

      2. Well said. Just about the truth.

      :hi:

      If a person is required to be loyal to a political party and not question their stands on issues, then any semblance of real truth is lost. https://twitter.com/madfloridian
    • d3lic (912 posts)
      Profile photo of d3lic

      3. She really fucked up in presenting her "public position".

      What came across about her “public position” was that she and her husband were paid over $250million in outright graft, had to create a “family charitable foundation” to handle the overflow.  Bloody amazing.  Didn’t take any wikileaked Podesta email to figure that out, but it was nice to get the confirmation.

    • Enthusiast (6022 posts)
      Profile photo of Enthusiast Donor

      6. Precisely.

      If it wasn’t for those damned Russians (LOL) we wouldn’t know her innermost secrets. Even though many of us had already correctly guessed her innermost sentiments.

      "The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. There would be no place to hide."  Frank Church
  • Ferd Berfel (2947 posts)
    Profile photo of Ferd Berfel Donor

    4. not drawing bright lines….

    So they can dump progressives and merge in republicans in our place. Some of the things we found out about during the last election cycle have been in the plan for a long time

    …and you think you’re going to stop this simply by ‘pulling a lever’, in a booth, behind a curtain, every 2 years? Know yourself. And if you need help, call the FBI.
    • madfloridian (1370 posts)
      Profile photo of madfloridian Donor

      7. They've been trying to "dump" progressives for ages…more obvious now.

      Much more obvious.  You are right.

      If a person is required to be loyal to a political party and not question their stands on issues, then any semblance of real truth is lost. https://twitter.com/madfloridian
      • Ferd Berfel (2947 posts)
        Profile photo of Ferd Berfel Donor

        8. They actually said it out loud

        during this cycle :”we dont need the Bernie people because will get the centrist* republicans ” crap. And they didn’t get the progressives (in numbers) or the centrist* republicans (in numbers)  – massive fail.

        • keeping in mind that the Center today is so far to the right that Eisenhower, Nixon and Reagan wouldn’t qualify as republicans.
        …and you think you’re going to stop this simply by ‘pulling a lever’, in a booth, behind a curtain, every 2 years? Know yourself. And if you need help, call the FBI.
  • Enthusiast (6022 posts)
    Profile photo of Enthusiast Donor

    5. Recommended to the max!

    If Obama had used the bully pulpit to promote that “Robust” Public Option constituent pressure could have been brought to bear.

    Preserving the profit element in health care was the ACA downfall.

    Healthcare cannot be viewed as a commodity. There is no good argument for it.

    "The NSA’s capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything. There would be no place to hide."  Frank Church
    • madfloridian (1370 posts)
      Profile photo of madfloridian Donor

      9. "Healthcare cannot be viewed as a commodity. "

      So true.  :hi:

      If a person is required to be loyal to a political party and not question their stands on issues, then any semblance of real truth is lost. https://twitter.com/madfloridian
  • Ohio Barbarian (1352 posts)
    Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

    10. Great post. I'm so sick of Democratic incrementalism and "Don't let the perfect

    be the enemy of the good” garbage they spew that I could just :puke:

    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."--Voltaire  
  • Major Hogwash (1675 posts)
    Profile photo of Major Hogwash

    11. When they had the majority, they all sat around and argued about . . .

    . . . whether to use the power they had or not. They didn’t want to have a backlash against them for being heavy-handed.

    How’d that work out for them?