Capitulation by Democrats in name only. w/poll

This was originally posted to DailyKos as a diary.  The link to the original is here:  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/4/2 21427/6809

From Dictionary.com, here's some definitions for capitulation:

1) the act of capitulating.  

2) the document containing the terms of a surrender.  

3) a list of the headings or main divisions of a subject; a summary or enumeration.  

4) Often, capitulations. a treaty or agreement by which subjects of one country residing or traveling in another are extended extraterritorial rights or special privileges, esp. such a treaty between a European country and the former Ottoman rulers of Turkey.  

Some things to consider after the fold:

Lincoln (D) Yes
Pryor (D) Yes
Feinstein (D) Yes
Salazar (D) Yes
Carper (D) Yes
Nelson (D) Yes
Inouye (D) Yes
Bayh (D) Yes
Landrieu (D) Yes
Mikulski (D) Yes
Klobuchar (D) Yes
McCaskill (D) Yes
Nelson (D) Yes
Conrad (D) Yes
Casey (D) Yes
Webb (D) Yes

These are the 16 senators who chose to capitulate on the FISA bill last night.

Of the 233 Democratic members of the House, only 178 members voted against the FISA capitulation bill.  That means that there were 55 Democrats who either voted for the capitulation bill or chose not to vote.

For those who voted for this bill, I personally will give no support for them.  As far as I'm concerned:

1) They are Democrats in name only.  They should be thrown out of the party.  This isn't purity, this is about allowing the government to spy on it's own people. Period. If they choose to let this corrupt and criminal administration spy on us, they should join the party that supports such actions.

2) We don't have a majority in either house of Congress.  We should start today by running Democrats and progressives against each person calling themselves Democrats in the primaries, and as independents as the case may be (I think some congressional candidates are still selected by convention rather than primaries in some states).

3) We shouldn't support the national Democratic fundraising organizations.  We have ActBlue and similar ways of supporting true Democrats.  Supporting the national Democratic organizations allows some of our monies to go to people who are Democrats in name only.  If the Democratic Progessive Caucus wishes to set up a fundraising arm in lieu of the general national party fundraising apparatus, and it pledges not to dontate to Democrats in name only, then I would support such a fundraising arm.

4) We need to realize that a D next to a person's name doesn't automatically make them progressive or make them fit for support from progressives.  I support the Democratic Party being a progressive party, I'll even support moderate Democrats.  I will not support Democrats in name only that choose to support the current administration.  It looks like none of our presidential candidates supported this capitulation, so I'll be able to support whoever wins in the current nominating cycle.

The fun from the 2006 elections was an illusion.  We've seen it before and hoped it wasn't true, but the last two days should shatter any illusions we had.  It's time to work for a Democratic Party that stands for the people of this country.  I think we've had a good start, but we're not nearly as far along as we thought we were.

Tags: Capitulation, Collaboration, FISA, United State House of Representatives, United States Senate (all tags)

Comments

8 Comments

hyperbole

Another hyperbole by the ultra liberals. Is it possible that these senators actual represent the interest of their consitituencies which are more mainstream?

I can't understand why the ultra liberal groups want to impose their minority opinion upon mainstream voters?

by areyouready 2007-08-04 07:20PM | 0 recs
Re: hyperbole

When it turns out that you're one of the ones that the administration decides to spy on, talk about hyperbole then.

by rjones2818 2007-08-04 07:36PM | 0 recs
Re: hyperbole

What? Do you not value the constitution? Do not value your rights? Tell me, how did these Senators represent their constituents by devaluing the constitution?

by Sarah Lane 2007-08-04 08:22PM | 0 recs
The Bad Touch

ultra liberals?

huh?

I am so tired of your shit.

Your candidate sucks on the issues.

She is as shrill as it gets.

And she can't win the general.

Oh, and as soon as she wins the nomination she would have to deal with the media bringing up her knowledge of Bill's horny ass and all of his doing the "bad touch".  We all know that.  You know that.  But instead you advocate for a DLC loser when there is a progressive winner like John Edwards.  Hell, Barack Obama would be a billion times better than Hillary.

I know what they she should change her campaign song to...

"You and me baby aint nuthin but mammals so let's do it like they do on the discovery channel"

"Sweat baby, sweat baby, sex is a Texas drought, you and me do the type of things that no one likes to talk about.  So put your hands down my pants, and I bet you'll feel nuts.  Yes I'm Siskel, yes I'm Ebert and you're getting two thumbs up."  

by Michael 4 Edwards 2007-08-05 05:19AM | 0 recs
Re: hyperbole

sigh.

by leewesley 2007-08-05 08:50AM | 0 recs
Re: hyperbole

Ok, now it is CLEAR, "areyouready", that you are a troll PLANT, on this site and on DAILYKOS.

You should try to be less obvious.  If you aren't a plant, then you are certainly D.I.N.O. and a closet fascist.

by John Poet 2007-08-05 08:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Capitulation by Democrats in name only. w/poll

Mikulski is the one that stands out to me the most on this list.  The rest are either from red or purple states that could be competitive, but Mikulski is incredibly entrenched, the GOP is in disarray here in MD, and she usually is on the right side of the issues.

A lot of those names I'd expect to see.

by takingbackamerica 2007-08-04 07:40PM | 0 recs
"areyouready"

Hey, bud.

I'm starting a "file" on YOU.

So, how do you like it?

by John Poet 2007-08-05 08:45PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------