I have zero desire to “unite” behind any Blue Dog

This is two posts in one — the post I need to write, and the post I was trying to write.

An explanation — the post I need to write

The position of vice-chair of the House Democratic Caucus — the fifth-ranking position in caucus leadership — was, up until the time of this writing (late Wednesday Nov. 28), contested.

The contestants: CA progressive Barbara Lee and corrupt New Dem Joe Crowley (see Howie Klein below for that explanation). The battle: Progressive vs. New Dem (aka Blue Dog Clintonista) for control of the last caucus leadership position. Time to define what Dems as a caucus stand for? Yep, a real test of the whole caucus.

Well, just now (the day before the vote was to have taken place), Lee dropped out.

Politico:

Cong. Barbara Lee

Cong. Barbara Lee

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) said Wednesday that she is dropping her leadership bid in what would’ve been the only contested race among House Democrats.

This means Rep. Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.) [former vice-chair of the New Dem Caucus]  is a sure bet to become the next vice chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, the fifth-ranking post in leadership. …

Lee, a former chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said she was withdrawing her bid in order to “unify” lawmakers around Crowley.

You can read on, but the rest of the explanation is just words. You can choose to be dazzled by them or not.

Progressive are divided in how to read this. (Please note, I’m not divided at all; I don’t want a party-first progressive coalition.)

▪ One group says, Lee is a good progressive (truly, she has performed well), she took a whip count of the caucus votes, found she didn’t have the votes, and withdrew.

▪ The other group says that yet one more progressive challenges the New Dem (Blue Dog, Rubinite NeoLiberal) stranglehold on Dem caucus leadership, then gives up in a show of “collegiality” without forcing anything so unseemly as a vote that reveals the strength of that wicked stranglehold. This is what I mean about “collegiality”:

Lee, a former chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said she was withdrawing her bid in order to “unify” lawmakers around Crowley.

Saving Dem faces. To which I might easily say:

Dear Ms. Lee,

Do you not understand that this is not my goal, nor the goal of any progressive — to unite House Dems behind the Blue Dogs (New Dems, Rubinesquitos, corporate whores)? We want to un-unite the Dems behind such leaders. And we don’t want to make the caucus comfortable — we want to make them uncomfortable in their unity behind such people. We want them to vote; we want the whores to declare their allegiance.

Dear Ms. Lee, you’re telling me that you now want the opposite of what I want — and what a great many other progressives also want.

What am I to make of that? If you didn’t want to fight, don’t run. I get that — it saves ammo for battles you can win. But if you were going to play patty-cake all along (or “Alphonse and Gaston”), don’t gin up the natives (us supporters and people like Howie Klein below) to go to all out for you. Tell us up front you were going to cave if it wasn’t a gimme.

Because now I feel like one off the rubes, and not in a good way.

GP

So that’s the post I need to write. Ugh, no matter how you slice it.

The post I was trying to write

Below is the post I was trying to write, pre the news. The following is intact, from almost an hour ago, before Barbara Lee  said, in effect, “please support Crowley after all.” Read on, but remember, this is pre-surrender. Still, there’s much good background on Crowley and Pelosi in this, including why caving to Crowley is particularly bad for progressives.

My surrender-preempted post — please note the Pelosi part:

The Crowley vs. Lee battle for the Dem House leadership position will tell the future of the party. Blue Dog/New Dem/corporate shill Joe Crowley is facing off against progressive Barbara Lee for the position of caucus vice-chair, one of the top leadership positions in the Democratic Party.

The election is Thursday (today). Watch it carefully. If Lee is defeated, you’ll know two things:

1. The New Dem–minded caucus members now control the Congressional Democratic Caucus.

2. Nancy Pelosi has surrendered the last ounce of “liberal” brand-legitimacy she has and is fully complicit (see below). “NewDem Nancy” — has an accurate ring to it.

Does bowing to power make her do it? Does NewDem–mindedness cause this? Who cares? Deeds, madam. You paint yourself with your deeds.

And these deeds are clear. Howie Klein at DownWithTyranny, who sounds like he’s kind of had it (my emphases):

Urgent Congressional Election This Thursday

There’s a crucial and defining election coming up tomorrow [Thursday] but unless you’ve been reading DWT you probably don’t know about it. I’d be in a state of shock if any of the MSNBC anchors mention it, even Rachel. It’s part of the concerted move by the New Dem Coalition– a corporately funded conglomeration of economically conservative anti-family Democratic sell-outs– to take over every aspect of the House Democratic Caucus. And they appear to be winning. Tomorrow the main event is a caucus vote to pick the next vice chair of the [Democratic] Caucus.

In the year House Democrats are bragging how women and minorities are a majority of their caucus, progressive icon Barbara Lee, beloved and respected by both the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional Progressive Caucus, should be a show-in. But she’s the decided underdog to one of the most corrupt men to sit in Congress in any of our lifetimes, Queens County Democratic boss and Wall Street/K Street whore, Joe Crowley, until last week, chairman of the New Dems.

If Lee is the very best of what Democrats have to offer– she is– Crowley is the very worst. He stands for nothing at all but naked power and systemic corruption. … [Read to learn why; stunning stuff]

So that’s what’s at stake.

Nancy Pelosi’s role

Now for Ms. Liberal SanFran’s role in this. Klein again:

One of my friends in the caucus tells me [Pelosi is] already paying special deference to Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Crowley as the next generation of House leadership. “They’re given precedence over even the most senior committee ranking members these days,” my friend groused.

And later in his article:

Crowley, as you could probably guess, is part of the Steny Hoyer Team. Recently a Democratic congressman predicted that if Hoyer becomes Speaker “he will run every bill by K Street and nothing will ever happen.” Well, Rachel and Lawrence and Big Ed may be missing it, but this faction is sealing it’s control of the congressional Democrats on Thursday, Pelosi smiling benignly from the sidelines.

According to Klein, Nancy Pelosi is presiding actively over the NewDem-ification (NeoLiberal-ization, BlueDog-transformation) of the next-round House Democratic party.

Complicit. “NewDem Nancy” indeed. Say it loud and often, then point to Klein’s article to back yourself up in discussion. You won’t be wrong.

How to help out

[Deleted. Lee caved, bailed, and wants me to be pleased for the other side, so I'm taking this out, including the part about thanking Ms. Lee by donating to her next election.]

So there you go.

What to make of this?

First, that progressives are divided about Barbara Lee’s action, because she has been so good on many other things. Many say let it go, this leader-race is small potatoes. (Answer to that — re-read Klein above and decide for yourself.)

Second, this looks and feels awful, whether it’s smart on her part or not. One more Democrat’s early cave — remember the woman who slapped Wisconsin recall candidate Tom Barrett for conceding before all votes were counted? And that classic statement above deserves another walk of shame:

Lee, a former chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said she was withdrawing her bid in order to “unify” lawmakers around Crowley.

No real progressive wants this “unity” — we want division and a battle for control. Either that, or we don’t want you coming around for money to do stuff like this. We’re getting nowhere with this “collegiality.” Remember, we in the cheap seats are not in this DC club. All those collegiality bennies are yours, not ours. We want a fight, since we’re the ones taking the risks.

Finally, go back to the Pelosi part above — I made it big and bold for easy finding. Again, according to Klein:

[Pelosi is] already paying special deference to Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Crowley as the next generation of House leadership. “They’re given precedence over even the most senior committee ranking members these days,” my friend groused.

Which means that Pelosi is One of Them. Period. She is not your friend, whatever she calls herself.

What to do

First, make up your mind about Ms. Lee. The comments to this post will probably detail the much good she’s done — I hear her praised constantly.

Second, you might let her office know what your reaction is — you like her attempt, you dislike the withdrawal, you dislike the statement of unity; whatever. A lot of people have gotten worked up about this election (Klein’s not alone), and even if it’s lesser potatoes, it’s potatoes that got a lot of attention, and some of us spent some cycles on the issue.

So I think she’d benefit from hearing from you, just so she’s not insulated from the masses on this. To that end, here are two pieces of data — remember, be polite but clear:

Twitter: @RepBarbaraLee
DC office: 202-225-2661

 If you do call or otherwise get an answer, please let us know in the comments what that is. Thanks.

GP

To follow or send links: @Gaius_Publius


Gaius Publius is a professional writer living on the West Coast of the United States. Click here for more. Follow him on Twitter @Gaius_Publius and Facebook.

Share This Post

  • GaiusPublius

    Agree with one exception. 2016 will be the campaign where everyone pretends to be serious about the too-late-to-fix climate catastrophe. Otherwise, dead on, BeccaM.

    GP

  • Ford Prefect

    Sadly true. This is why I didn’t vote for any Dems above County level this year. The local Dems haven’t pissed me off yet, but they probably will soon enough.

  • caphillprof

    If they seethe hatred, they’re Republican.

    Subject: [americablog] Re: I have zero desire to “ unite” behind any Blue Dog

  • Soullite

    The Democratic party is dead, corrupt. They are not weak. They are not feckless. They are not misguided, and they are not stupid. They are simply evil.

    The Democratic Party lost 7 million voters between 2008 and 2012. This is a large part of the reason why.

  • tsuki

    I don’t know what you are worried about. President Obama met with Llord Blankfein and received his marching orders, in a totally transparent manner, of course.

    Lee, Pelosi and Reid are entirely superfluous, NewDem, OldDem, UselessDem.

  • Chathamization

    Becoming a PCP doesn’t mean you have to support the party. All it does is give you some (limited) power within the party, if you choose to wield it. Perhaps you think it would give some tacit approval, but honestly, you think most people know who their PCP person is, or even if they have one?

  • Kenneth C. Fingeret

    Hello caphillprof,

    How do you tell them apart?

  • Kenneth C. Fingeret

    Hello Chathamization,

    You missed the easiest way. No people support – no party. Money only buys certain things. Where are the Whigs?

  • lynchie

    There is no political suicide if we keep electing people who betray us for their corporate masters. When election time comes their names are on the ballot along with a republican. We cringe at electing the democrat but can’t rationalize a vote for the other side so we vote for the dem. They know this, Obama plays us and has done a great job in convincing us with this great anthem speeches invoking grand ideas and they make people feel good about him and about the country. Problem is he like the rest of the party gets our vote and then shits on the dinner table for the next four years. He fights for right wing principles and claims he can’t get to the things he promised to fight for and gives in.

    I have said this many times but i will again, George Carlin said it best. The rich have a club and we are not in it. They will get all our SS, Medicare, Medicaid and when they have that they will take our mortgage deductions, cut education, welfare, help for the elderly and expand the Military because they need a strong military to keep all of us on the reservation.

  • Bill_Perdue

    There are no progressives in the Democrat party.

    It’s composed of right centrists, rapidly moving right to out flank the Republicans, the other right centrist party.

    Since the Republicans lost because of their emphasis on social issues like abortion and marriage equality they and the Democrats are going to emphasize gutting working class entitlements like Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid and busting unions.

    That will all unfold at the end of this year or the beginning of next year, followed swiftly by mounting rage from workers which will go far to promote the prospects of building workers parties and creating a workers government.

  • FunMe

    And around and around we go. I’m not playing their game anymore. Thank goodness!

  • http://twitter.com/UnitedCitizens1 Citizen United

    Bernie Sanders isn’t a democrat because he is so far left (and I mean that in a good way) but he votes with the democrats so he pretty much is one.

  • http://twitter.com/UnitedCitizens1 Citizen United

    I don’t know. This and the linked DWT article really attacked Crowley as “the most corrupt man to ever sit in Congress in any of our lifetimes” but gave nothing to back that up. I just watched that speechless speech and it was great. I also looked at his voting history and I am not really sure where these two articles are getting this from, maybe they have a close connection to Barbara Lee, or at least thats the way it seems.

  • http://twitter.com/UnitedCitizens1 Citizen United

    How many democrats changed to independents?

  • gmh

    Ms Pelosi is one of the reason many Democrats changed and will change their affiliation to Independent. With her in Congress their is no hope of the House of Representatives Democrats being anything other than a pawns of Obama. Time will tell is the Progressive Caucus follows suit. If it does, then start pushing for third party candidates for 2014.

  • Chathamization

    Well, Gaius’ post is about intra-party politics. If you’re convinced that both parties are corrupt and mafia like, then this shouldn’t matter to you one way or another.

  • mf_roe

    Careful, too much truth frightens the believers. Until a critical mass of citizens awakens to the sham of two parties, beyond the control of the voters, controlling the process of meaningful political speech (Electing people you actually can trust) nothing will improve.

    Listen to the rank and file tea party people, they are really pissed off because they feel they aren’t being listened to by the government–pretty much the same complaint that progressives. The only people who seem pleased with how the system works are the people within the system. Politicians feel no need to fix a system that works just fine for them. As you say, the solution will come from external sources. I expect that we aren’t even close to that point because most still have faith in their political party.

  • Indigo

    This we knew when we cast our votes for Obama, that’s he’s a Blue Dog. We have to live with that just like moderate Republicans had to live with Romney. We’re already compromised, that dog’s been in the house and on the sofa for four years. There’s no sense acting surprised at this point.

  • A reader in Colorado

    Parties having this kind of power at all is part of what’s wrong with this country. Do you understand – we do not want parties having the power to choose who goes on the ballot.

  • Ford Prefect

    I would humbly submit that “Obama Supporter” and “progressive” are mutually exclusive terms. If that’s not clear to certain people now, it will be when OFA cranks up their “Cut SS and Medicare NOW!” campaign.

    OFA is already using the “don’t raise taxes on the middle class” meme to justify keeping the Bush-Obama Tax Cuts in place. I can’t wait until they campaign on “70’s not too old to work!”, as I’m sure that will prove extremely popular.

  • A reader in Colorado

    It’s because of fools that are easily distracted by shiny objects that the Democratic leadership gets away with what it gets away with.

    All they have to do is wave some ridiculous torn team sports jersey and then all the little fools line up behind the New Dems against the Republicans. My facebook page is filled with all of the dastardly stands of the Republican Party in favor of their Democratic Hero because the Republicans are so dastardly, some so ridiculously hypocritical as to provoke derisive laughter were it not so sad. Republicans are warmongers. Warmongers! we are told, and, well, the drone strikes are just acts in a broader war against terra and are justified when Obama does it.

    Just one piece of a hundred little hypocrisies. I had one of my liberal friends on facebook the other day talking about dastardly insurance companies and the dastardly wealth of their dastardly CEO’s. When I pointed out that the misnamed Affordable Care Act actually enshrines these dastardly companies and their dastardly CEO’s and makes them permanent and unremovable features of our misnamed health care system – that the Democrats did this on purpose, I got nothing. Dead silence.

    These people, these faux-impotent progressives and their cynical New Dem dog leash holders, only get to do what they do because of my liberal friends and people like them deliberately sticking their head in the ground, attacking Republicans while supporting people who just manage to, as if “by accident” wind up doing the exact same or similar things the Republicans want to do.

    The fact is, “support” only enables these perfidies. Support of any of them only enables this crap.

    They, our supposed munificent royalist Democratic benefactors, don’t need our support. Ever, unless they actually do the job they were elected to do and not until then. They need to be made to feel the heat, because that’s the only way anything ever changes. Their approval rating ought to be 2% right now, but because of the ever present Republican kewpie doll, it isn’t. That’s what causes this.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    I came to that conclusion two years into Obummer’s reign and caught endless hell for supporting third party candidates. The most virulent criticisms came from so-called progressives of the O’bot sort.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    That’s a good question considering that Obama advisers let her recreate a powerful consumer protection agency and then dumpted her like a hot potato when it appeared how effective it would be.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    well done!

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    The only thing worse than a Republican is a smug lesser evil.

  • http://adgitadiaries.com/ karmanot

    What would expect for voting in the lesser evil?——

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    At the risk of irony, nothing is ever an absolute.

    Lieberman got some due credit for helping to push the DADT repeal through the 2010 lame duck session, when all the Dems wanted to do was lick their mid-term wounds and indulge in some hippie-punching. Didn’t really balance out all his douche-nozzlery over this Senate career, but he did deserve the kudos for that.

    The point is while Crowley is in the right place on many social issues, he is firmly in the pocket of anti-progressive lobbyists. I’d also add that two of those three posts you cited were not written by Gaius Publius, but by Joe Sudbay, AmericaBlog is not a monolithic blog and there are differences of opinion among the front-pagers. And even I would also agree that Crowley’s “silent speech protest” on the House floor was brilliantly done.

  • http://twitter.com/marcuswoollen Marcus Woollen
  • Ford Prefect

    Alternatively, what they are learning is their own base is eager to be betrayed and they can make big bucks doing so!

    Notice how Obama is claiming a “mandate” on all the things he didn’t campaign on, while ignoring the things he almost alluded to in his campaign. Did he campaign on raising the retirement age to 70? No. But does he presently claim a mandate to do it now? Yep.

    Either way, the pols get to make a ton of money, so winning/losing isn’t such a concern anymore. If you could make a few million dollars by losing an election, would you? Probably not you, since you have integrity, but others lacking that attribute? Hell yes!

    The Democrats will gladly commit political suicide over the longer term, since they’ll be off in the Caymans spending quality time with their bank accounts when the shit hits the fan.

  • Ford Prefect

    The answer to the Banking Committee is: 1) Reid, 2) Durbin and 3) Schumer. I can’t imagine Schumer wanting Warren on the committee unless she surrenders any interest in serving the Public Interest. Durbin will decide whatever Obama tells him to decide, so he’ll offer Thumbs Down on that one. Reid? Who knows. He’ll probably support Schumer and Durbin and let it go at that.

    Of course, if Warren gets the shiv on Banking and ends up on something much less important, that will make the whole point of electing her moot in the first place! Then, of course, we’ll hear the rationalizations about seniority or some such and if we just wait 20 years or so, she might chair the committee by then… Don’t give up! We might make some progress a decade or two after we’re all dead!

  • Naja pallida

    Democrats, bravely lurching to the right in defiance of those who voted for them, all in the name of some false sense of unity, which cannot exist as long as they keep lurching to the right. We like to laugh that Republicans haven’t learned their lessons from this electoral loss, Democrats haven’t learned anything from their wins – which is almost more sad.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    Indeed. BTW, one of the confirmations of your #2 point there will be whether Senator-elect Elizabeth Warren gets the Banking committee assignment, or anything else remotely connected to consumer protections or economic policy. Who decides who ends up on these committees? The Democratic Senate leadership — and yet the Powers That Be (i.e., our plutocratic lords and masters) are lobbying hard to prevent Warren’s selection.

  • ezpz

    And worse than a republican is another republican pretending to be a democrat.

    Chris Rowthorn (written almost 3 years ago):

    Barack Obama: Karl Rove’s Manchurian Candidate

    Somewhere today, Karl Rove is rolling on the floor with laughter. I mean, I’m not a birther, but I find myself wondering if Barack Obama was actually created in Karl Rove’s secret underground lair as a devious way to sink the Democrats once and for all. Let’s face it: if Obama had purposely set out to do as much harm as possible to the Democrats, he could not have succeeded any more brilliantly…”

    http://smirkingchimp.com/thread/26195

  • Ford Prefect

    I’m old enough to remember this intra-party debate twenty years ago. Back then, I was on the other side, claiming the party could be reformed from within. Corporate Big Money was a big issue then as well, but it’s only gotten worse over time. So too has the rise of Clintonoid Neo-Liberalism and the corruption inherent to that made things much, much worse… and that was a big threat twenty years ago. Party progressives could see all this happening back then, but it’s difficult to give up on something to which one has committed so much time, energy and hard work over the years.

    All this is to say: Wake up and smell the coffee. When House “Progressives” are split on the question of having one of their own in a leadership position, they have basically surrendered and now stand for nothing at all, save their own enrichment. Realistically, we can reduce the size of the HPC by half just on this very simple question.

    The Party’s over folks, if you’ll excuse the pun. We can continue to bang our heads against the wall in the vain hope of something good happening, or we can put our resources into something that will eventually produce meaningful results (I’m intentionally vague on that point to avoid silly prognostications: I’m not convinced there really is a sizable progressive constituency in this country, given the rate at which “progressives” are willing to sell out their values in favor of glum rationalizations).

    Barbara Lee surrendered for a reason or reasons. Pelosi almost assuredly was pivotal in Lee’s decision, simply because she’s Top Dog in the caucus. Once again, we see the Party’s alleged “feminism” take the back seat to crass, corrupt interests. But Lee’s surrender is also bad for the CBC, so let’s not forget that either. Caucus leadership is fashioned around the interests of the top dogs and progressives (or even merely honest people) are simply not allowed in the citadel.

  • Ford Prefect

    Because all of their incentives lie in their willingness to betray their base. Win or lose, betray the base means big money for them. Staying true to the base means winning or losing without all that money coming in. Indeed, it means Party leadership actively sabotaging them at every opportunity.

  • Ford Prefect

    1) Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat and with good reason: his career would have ended a couple decades ago as a Democrat and he’s known that all along.

    2) We can elect the odd “progressive,” but they only serve as window dressing when they need to rally the base around corrupt Neo-Liberals like the entirety of Democratic Leadership. So that’s no solution either. There simply aren’t enough good ones to make any difference within the Democratic Party.

    3) It’s not just corporate money in elections. Indeed, the biggest problem for progressive Democrats is the fact that corporate money controls the Party in which they reside. I mean, who controls candidate recruitment and selection? Who controls the primaries? The parties control that. As such, the institution itself is broken.

  • http://www.rebeccamorn.com/mind BeccaM

    C’mon — it’s not like we didn’t know this is what was going to happen.

    Step 1: Dems pretend to stand once again for traditional Democratic progressive principles to get the base all riled up and willing to stand in line for hours to cast a vote, overwhelming the GOP voter suppression machine (but insufficient to overcome the GOP 2010 gerrymandering, keeping the House in the hands of the Republicans).
    Step 2: Immediately marginalize all of the progressive and liberal Democratic voices through claims of needing bipartisanship or unity or that most awesome of position-swapping powers: ‘Seriousness.’
    Step 3: ConservaDems, austerity fetishists, neoliberal corporatists and plutocratic bastards — all freshly returned to being 100% in charge of the political agenda — assert that short-term deficits must be addressed chiefly though cutting Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and govt/military pensions, all long-term measures, the effects of which won’t have a significant impact on the deficit for at least 10-20 years, but which will impact the 99%’s lives almost immediately. In exchange? A few minor token tax hikes on the wealthy, but accompanied by additional hikes and loophole closures that weirdly enough impact the middle class harder than anybody else. (Remember when credit card interest used to be tax deductible? I do.) Oh, and the AMT and debt ceiling remain unfixed, along with other ‘temporary’ tax cuts, allowing for plenty of brinksmanship hostage taking over the next two years. Each time, the GOP gets 99% of what it wants and complains bitterly about the lack of cooperation and the Dems tell their base the latest s**t sandwich really is delicious and good for them and the entire country.

    Step 4: Big mid-term losses in 2014 for the Dems, who immediately begin blaming African Americans, Latinos, young voters, gays, and hippies for being lazy and failing to turn out to vote.
    Step 5: It’s 2016, and Dems pretend to stand once again for traditional progressive principles to get the base all riled up and willing to stand in line for hours to cast a vote…

  • mycher

    I just called Barbara Lee’s office and spelled out how disappointed I am in her decision, how duped I feel by the non-fight, party unity thing and in Nancy Pelosi, too. I said if this is the way it’s going to be with “progressives”, my future campaign donations and votes would be better spent on third party candidates. The aide promised to pass my comments along to Rep. Lee.

  • Chathamization

    One way to change the party leadership is to become a precinct committee person:
    http://www.eagleforum.org/misc/brochures/precinct-committman.shtml

    “To change things, we must change the laws.

    To change the laws, we must change the people who make them.

    To get elected, your candidate must be on the ballot.

    To get on the November ballot you must win the Primary.

    To win the Primary, you must get the support of people who make endorsements in the Primary, who reliably vote in the Primary, and who get out the vote of others in the Primary. Those people are the Precinct Committeemen.”
    It’s hard to effect intra-party politics when you’re not part of the party.

  • chrisdarling

    In 2004, Robert Kenndy Jr. said that the Republicans are 95% corrupt and the Democrats are 75% corrupt because corporate money is the major source of funding for both. I would say that now it is 99% and 85% respectively. Unfortunately, until we get corporate money out of politics, the corruption will not change.

    My daughter was traveling in Europe this fall. When her German friends heard how money corrupts the elections here, they were horrified. There, each party gets an equal amount of money to campaign with so that the playing field is level. So we have to have public financing of campaigns and a ban on independent spending and funding of third parties by public money.

    It will take a constitutional amendment to do that. Until then, the only way we beat corporate money in the Democratic party is by electing people who are primarily or totally funded by small donations. People like Bernie Sanders, Sherrod Brown and especially Elizabeth Warren,

  • caphillprof

    The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican

    Why or why cannot Democrats represent their voters? their base?

© 2014 AMERICAblog News. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS