BS: Party Purity

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Amos
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 11:28 PM

From the opening post it has nothing to do with some arbitrary idea of "purity", which makes it sounds like a bunch of brownshirts or something. it's a political coalition trying to poorganize support for its platform. Doh. At least they aren't pulling secret strings to persecute those who do not agree with them as the Bushites were wont to do.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: robomatic
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 09:27 PM

Well, the one on the right was on the left
And the one in the middle was on the right
And the one on the left was in the middle
And the guy in the rear burned his driver's license

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Bill D
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 07:24 PM

bruce... Democrats have problem members, just as Republicans do. We don't have to explain every one who goes off on a toot.

Do YOU want to explain Tom DeLay or a couple of those congressmen who have been sending the racist emails & videos out?

I don't start threads daring you to.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 06:37 PM

("Sorry if some here find it a problem that Demodrats all don't agree, any more than Republicans did)" bb

May I suggest that it would be beyond dumb if anyone expected or even desired all Democrats to think the same about everything.

(I'll leave that mindset to the simplistic Republicans.)

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: katlaughing
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 06:21 PM

Here's another vote for what Jeri suggested.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 05:59 PM

Left, right, left, right,
right, left, right, left,
Center!

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 05:25 PM

Amos,

You have failed to read the opening post. The LEFT wing of the Democratic Party is the one seeking purity.

Look back, and tell me how BOTH parts of the Democratic Party are just dumb- That I might agree with you on!

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Amos
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 05:21 PM

I don't need to make excuses for somebody being stupid whether they are a Republican, a Democrat, or a damn Munchkin. Dumb is dumb and not identifying differences and similarities where they exist is pretty much the core nature of dumb. BTW, I like Bruce too, and enjoy his company, when I see him; and I concur with Big Mick.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: GUEST,Sorcha
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 05:18 PM

I agree with Jeri. Yea, I can be a pretty crabby old lady, but Jeri can be pretty crabby when she feels the need too.

Delete if you like, I don't care much anymore.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 05:04 PM

I like Bruce, and enjoy his company when I see him.

I wish he would do exactly as Jeri suggests.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: curmudgeon
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 04:53 PM

He's a bloody DINO!

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 04:30 PM

Amos,

He's a Democrat- YOU have to make excuses for him.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Amos
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 04:28 PM

WHat horse manure. Is he completely ignoring all the differences between Bush budgets and the new one? Is he intentionally ignoring all the news stories about plans tor edue the deficit in half by 2013? If so, why? Fondness for distortion? Or just lameness of brain?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: beardedbruce
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 03:23 PM

And from the other side of the Democratic Divide...

(Sorry if some here find it a problem that Demodrats all don't agree, any more than Republicans did)



February 26, 2009
Dem blasts Obama's budget
Posted: 02:50 PM ET

From CNN Congressional Producer Deirdre Walsh

Taylor, a Democrat, says the budget isn't 'change.'

(CNN) – Mississippi Democratic Rep. Gene Taylor blasted the budget outline President Obama submitted to Capitol Hill today, saying "I don't like it…change is not running up even bigger deficits that George Bush did."

"That's what George Bush did very well. Apparently that's what President Obama is doing."

Taylor, a conservative "blue dog" who voted against the stimulus bill, noted he was still reviewing the plan but was troubled by the additional amount of spending for many government programs on top of the recent increased funding many agencies received in the economic stimulus bill.

As a member of the Armed Service Committee, Taylor noted the budget only gives the Defense Department a "small increase," which he said would barely cover the cost of living adjustments for the military.

Taylor pointed to President Obama's inaugural address that called for Americans to make sacrifices, saying "It's certainly not reflected in his budget."

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 10:20 AM

Art,

""did you see this? I think this about it, what do you think?" "



I prefaced the initial post with

"IMO, this may give the Republicans a real chance."


Sorry I did not give an invitation for others to give their opinions. I assumed it was implied by my posting.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 10:11 AM

I'll add my own thinkin' on this: I resent and resist the inherent implication that just because I/we don't post to any of the 'Do You Care' threads that I don't care. As Jeri says above, we find things by ourselves, we think, we mourn, we contribute - and even if we did not, it is not for any one poster to decide what and how I should feel about anything.

Several times in the past I have seen threads that say "I can't believe that Mudcatters are silent on this ... they would have expressed lots of opinions about it if the shoe, etc, etc..." And yet that person had not him/herself written about it before, either.

Enough already.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: artbrooks
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 09:57 AM

While I agree with BB's positions on issues more often than I don't, and there are certainly many other people using Mudcat below-the-line for their own political purposes, I think that it would be good to have some kind of introduction to articles. This would be in the sense of "did you see this? I think this about it, what do you think?" Otherwise it is only a reprise of stuff on the AP and CNN feeds, which I already see. Referring to them as "Hey there people who are too stupid to find news articles without my help, read THIS" may be slightly unkind.

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: curmudgeon
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 09:36 AM

Motion seconded - Tom

Subject: RE: BS: Party Purity
From: Jeri
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 09:33 AM

B, instead of using Mudcat for your personal political blog, why don't you go get one off site so we can more easily ignore your 'Hey there people who are too stupid to find news articles without my help, read THIS!' shit.

Subject: BS: Party Purity
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 26 Feb 09 - 09:26 AM

IMO, this may give the Republicans a real chance.




February 26, 2009
Democrats to target Democrats in 2010
Posted: 08:58 AM ET

From CNN Political Editor Mark Preston


Conservative Democrats will take heat from members of their own party.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — A powerful union, influential bloggers and several liberal groups have formed a political coalition to pressure conservative Democrats to support liberal policy goals.

"Accountability Now PAC will recruit, coordinate and support primary challenges against vulnerable congressional incumbents who have become more responsive to corporate America than to their constituents," the PAC said in a written statement provided to CNN.

Accountability Now comprises of BlogPAC, Color of Change, DailyKos, Democracy for America, MoveOn, Service Employees International Union and 21st Century Democrats.

The PAC was created last September, and organizers have been acquiring funding and hiring an executive director to oversee the project, Jane Hamsher, of the political blog firedoglake.com, told CNN.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/