Our three leading presidential candidates are not only CENTRISTS, but all three are now cozying up to the religious wacko right. The worst offencder is Obama(note the ad on our site page).

The Congress has to change because we are apparently powerless to change the direction of our presidential candidates. That is purely a state by state battle. Each centrist Rep. or Senator must be, not only challenged, but defeated--a situation that may take the first half of this current century.

My own personal opinion is that we have Scallywags for candidates. Politics have reached the point where decent people will not sully themselves to run and serve. That is, serve the country and Constitution instead of themselves.

Sad times ahead.

Might be time to take a good look at dividing the country into autonomous regions instead of states. Under such a plan, the primarily Red states would soon starve themselves and the more productive Blue states would not have to cope with what they are coping with now.

Perhaps the day of huge countries is coming to an end.

A mind once expanded can never return to its original dimensions.

Anne Hathaway: 1556-1623

The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.

For those of us who have been trying without success to end the Iraq war, a division of states would be the answer. The democrats who support Senator Clinton et. al., and the Iraq war, can be members of the red states. Once it is clear that the red states members will have to go and fight their own wars, it will be a matter of time before either,(a) all of the people in the red states are dead due to endless wars, or(b) they will accept that their preemptive wars are not worth their lives, and stop their foreign wars.

The survival of red states are slim to none. If they stop their foreign wars, they would more than likely end up in civil wars. They would continue their fights over religion, race,money,who is better than who, who is more superior etc. The warmongers entire belief system is based on hate, and greed.  Once the people of the red states destroy themselves, the rest of us could retake the red states, make them blue, and hopefully live in a society of peace and justice.

If a pro-war, free-trader like Diane Feinstein, for instance, were to do the honest thing and join the Republican Party, she would never get re-elected in California because the electorate there is heavily Democratic. So she does something even better, consistently voting with the Repugnicans while simultaneously preventing a "real Democrat" from holding her seat in Congress. She knows that the likelihood of a a primary challenge from her own party is almost nil, so she can regularly flip off her constituents, vote after vote, election after election. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana is another senator who is really more of a Repugnican than a Democrat, but she would never "jump ship" for the same reason. There are too many similar examples within the Democratic Caucus, in both houses of Congress.

The so called "Blue Dog" coalition, right-wing Democrats in the House of Representatives, consistently support Duh-bya on any issue related to "domestic security" and solidly vote to perpetuate this abominable Iraq war. For example, in a recent Iraq war re-appropriation bill, 40 of these Democraps voted against their own party by opposing a conditional proposal for a troop withdrawal timeline. 30 of them voted, in the face of overwhelming public opposition and the majority of their own party's caucus, to expand Bush power to spy on "terrorists" (i.e., political enemies--that's you, folks). Democraps like these creeps are a large part of the reason why impeachment is permanently "off-the table," as it realistically would not stand a chance of success with a virtual "fifth-column" lurking within the ranks of the party.

The ascendancy of these traitors was not a natural or spontaneous phenomenon. A concerted effort was made by certain Democratic Party insiders prior to the last midterm election to oppose Democratic candidates running anti-war campaigns and to support their pro-war primary challengers through selective application of campaign funding. This was in violation of Democratic Party bylaws, perhaps even illegal, and one can only hope that the good Democrats of Illinois kick Rahm Emmanuel into an early retirement.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/090607J.shtml

...look for the purple, it's the inbetween color. It's a sure sign that some 'blue dog' or 'true blue liberal' is going red on us. It's that damned "third way" of Bill Clinton's, and that Centrist philosophy of the 90's. It opened the floodgates for Democritic-Hipocrats to pour through into the side where all the money is. And I believe that Hillary Clinton, if elected president,  would completely tear down the levies and America would become one big New Orleans. Those critters in Congress who vote for more wiretapping yet claim to be Democrats are the purple people eaters, along with those who leave Dodd hanging out on the filibuster limb, or pander to the religious-right by trying to instill Christianity into their campaigns while visiting key states. It always goes from blue to red, almost never the other way 'round. How many Republicans have gravitated over to our side? A few conservative citizens who are fed up with Iraq are talking bluish talk, mostly because they have lousy candidates. If they had a Red Rider to inspire them, boy, they'd be cheering him on  loudly and proudly. But I prefer that clear side-taking to the inbetween DLC purple gang who infiltrate our ranks and betray our causes.

Gotta love Pete Stark's comment this week in Congress when he skewered the pugs for not voting to override Bush's SCHIP veto: "You don't have money to fund the war or children," Stark accused Republicans. "But you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement." Now that's what I call an old-school, non-triangulating Democrat.

In true knee-jerk form, House Speaker Nancy "off-the-table" Pelosi immediately rebuked Stark's comments as "inappropriate" and "distracting." She couldn't actually let a member of her caucus get away with expressing the thoughts of 90% of his constituents. That's the kind of thing that could get out of hand. No, we Democrats don't want to be like "them." We must set a positive example by taking the "high-road" of "bipartisanship" as well as turning the other cheek whenever "they" screw us.

People like Pete Stark and Chris Dodd need all the support we can muster, at least in the form of an e-mail. As for Ms. Pelosi, I have a feeling Cindy Sheehan will give her more "partisanship" than she can handle in 2008.

This is to mainly first two persons. I am a blue dog and proud of it. Some of yall do not understand that liberalism and conservatism DOES NOT WORK. Most people most American are either independents or moderates.

Here is where I stand. I am for the programs that the Democratic Party have put in place. I am against the war in Iraq and I am against the wire tapping of American citizens.

I am against some of the views of the liberal/progessive wing of the Democratic Party like gay marriage, increase taxtion, among other things.

WIthout us so-called Blue Dogs and the conservative wing of the Democratic Party, the party would crease to exist much like the historic whig and federalist parties.

18% of Americans self identify as liberal

33% of Americans self identify as conservative

that leaves 49% that are left somewhere in the middle.

I'm somewhere in the middle, left of center,  living in an overwhelmingly Republican dominated county. It makes an ENORMOUS differance which party is in control. Ignoring that undeniable fact is as unrealistic as ignoring where the majority of Americans are at on the political spectrum.

At this moment the overwhelming majority of those in the middle favor the policies of the Democratic party. Whatever party wins the middle, wins the White House and control of the House and Senate.  When we win the White House, or 60 reliable votes in the Senate and solid control of the House, we can systematically begin to take this country back from the failed conservative movement that systematically took it from us.

mike kohr

IMO, The GOP and DLC?BlueDogs share the same world view regarding Voters and Voting. The people who vote are naturally those who have the most stake in the process. Wealthy, Upper Class and More Educated. Let's be honest, more Republicans in this group.

The Democrats and Republicans compete for this group of

voters.  The DLC/Blue Dogs have to run Republican Lite

to have a chance at winning.  When the voting is over

they have a strong Republican Consituency.  Therefore

when they vote in Congress, they have to vote GOP

because of their consituency.  Fear GOP voters who

voted for them and take Democrats for granted--even

though they are supposed Democratic Senators and

Congressmen.    Split the difference, Folks.

One Half the country does not vote because the

Democratic Party abandoned them years ago.

Yep we may need to divide the country--Blue and Red.

DLC.  Rather, I was stating the sorry state of affairs

in which we find ourselves. 

Perhaps I should not have said the DLCers/BlueDogs

have to run as Republican Lite.  I should say the powers

chose to do this.  This is the whole basis for DLC.

Al From refers to it as the "Likely Voters Strategy"

Every Poll using Likely Voters in cluding Gallop tell

you the poll is weighted toward Republicans because

Republicans are more likely to vote.

Do I like the fact that our Party writes off one half the

country in order to compete for this narrow part of

the electorate.  Heck No.  I have lost no love on the

DLC.

I am realistic enough to know things cannot change

this election.  It is too late for real change.  Once

again we will be taken for granted.

At some point, hopefully, someone will step forth and

we can start a truly Democratic Party.

You are right on.  The Red States are some of the

poorest.  Historically, Conservatism(be it Democratic

or Republican)  has reigned in these states.  You

only have to look to see the results.  Economic

Conservatism begets a society of few rcih and very

rich at the top   and then the rest. Brings on and

widens gap betweeen rich and poor.  It is the economic

conservatism of DLC/Blue Dogs which will bite them

in the end.  For right now, we hope.

DLC

D 

I posted the "Losing Hope" diary.  I feel exactly as you do, but can't say it as well.

I agree with Bill Harding.   The Problem for the Party is the

DLC/Blue Dogs.   This has been my position for years.

If we lose this time, the DLC had best do a lot of soul

searching.  

Give the people the choice between a Real Republican

and a fake Republican and they will choose the real

Republican everytime.

I fear right now the Dems on the Hill are going to lose

it for all Democrats.   What has held up Legislation very

often--  SOME DLC and BLUE DOGS vote with the GOP

rather than their own party.  It is obvious they are more

concerned with Republican Consituents  than Democratic Constiuents.   After all many of them played "Split the Difference". in getting elected.

Howard Dean and DNC have worked very hard to change

things and deserve much credit for their hard work. It takes time.