Tue
Apr 18 2017
05:59 am

Tom Perez and Sen. Bernie Sanders are coming to Louisville for the:

Come Together and Fight Back Tour

Tuesday, April 18th, doors open at 5:30 PM
Louisville Palace
Louisville, KY

cafkia's picture

Look, I know that politics

Look, I know that politics is, at its core, about discussion and compromise. I get that, I seriously do. OTOH I feel like true Progressives were well and truly burned in the Dem presidential primary and then again in the race to chair the DNC.

I am well aware that establishment Dems don't see anything wrong with what was done. I am well aware that many of them see Bernie as a Johnnie-come-lately usurper with pie in the sky ideas.

So pretty much all I expect from this unity tour is for the establishment Dems to use the time to sharpen the knives they will plunge into the good Senator's back at the first opportunity. I would love to be wrong but, between the sickening sycophantic sucking up to CheetoHitler TinyHands for ineffective ordinance use and infantile foreign policy positions, the verbal treatment of Tulsi Gabbard by Howard Dean and others, plus the continuing disparagement of Progressives by the lay establishment Dems on social media, I just don't think I am.

That makes it really difficult to get onboard. How many times do you stick your hand in a fire to see if it will burn you every time? A lot of us think once is plenty.

Establishment Dems are convinced they can balance the rightward tilt of the political scales by adding weight to the middle. I will never understand why and I have no intention of standing around to be an object lesson.

fischbobber's picture

You know.....

I think you're right.

I find it easier to get in a civi discussion about Bernie Sanders or public policy with a Republican than I do with a Clinton Democrat. I hope that changes.

bizgrrl's picture

Heh. I'm pretty sure a

Heh.

I'm pretty sure a Republican would agree with cafkia.

cafkia's picture

Really? About what? Let's

Really? About what? Let's see, there was discussion and compromise, those don't seem to be popular with republicans these days.

There was me complaining about morons cheering on 45 the inaccurate bomber. Republicans kinda like war.(for other people's children of course)

You are going to need to point out exactly what you think the republicans are gonna like in my comment 'cause I'm not seeing it.

Tamara Shepherd's picture

*

You know you're preaching to the choir with me, my old friend.

Looks like the so-called "unity tour" got off to a rocky start at its very first stop. Just the utterance of Perez' name was loudly booed, before he even got to take the podium (video at this link).

cafkia's picture

Your ever patient approach is

Your ever patient approach is a wonder to behold. I sincerely hope that it is working better than my frustrated appeals to logic and the obvious. (which is to say, I hope it is working 'cause whatever I'm doing sure as hell ain't)

Bbeanster's picture

Why the love for Tulsi

Why the love for Tulsi Gabbard?

How the hell do you excuse this shit? She turns my stomach. Literally. I expected better.

(link...)

cafkia's picture

It started with her open

It started with her open endorsement of Sanders. Just like with Bernie and damn near every other human I have met or heard about or imagined, I do not agree with her about everything.

I honestly thought Assad would be out of power by now and that it would be a good thing. However, after watching Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, Somalia, and Yemen, I have not changed my opinion of Assad but I am not sure that anything would be improved by callously removing him.

All of those problems can be traced in part to the idiotic thing that people keep saying as though it were gospel. "Well, he killed his own people". The first day I become king it will be legal to shoot anyone that says that. No one but me gets to decide who exactly is my tribe. If you see me killing someone, you may safely and reasonably conclude that I do not consider them a member of my tribe ergo not one of my own people. Arbitrary lines on a printed map do not a tribe make.

Tulsi appears to be guilty of believing there is a simple and just solution to the Syrian crisis. There is not. Wishing will not make it so. Whatever CheetoFace TinyHands does will be wrong. But that is probably true for whoever is in charge. Apparently Tulsi does not have her full measure of cynicism just yet. She is probably in for a painful lesson or ten.

fischbobber's picture

For starters......

She resigned her position as number 2 at the DNC before endorsing a candidate. This shows an ethical standard sorely missing from the rest of the DNC, including Hillary, who should have insisted DWS resign as head of the DNC before endorsing her candidacy.

As to Gabbard's position on Assad, considering the convoluted nature of the middle east, and the fact that her service and research of the middle east situation far surpasses any journalistic reporting we're getting from the area, there is really no way to know if she's right or wrong. All we really know is that her opinion is far more educated than virtually anyone else who has ventured one. In my opinion, that is a good thing.

Finally, her stand on the issues is far more in line with my way of thinking than the mainstream DNC positions.

You might want to consider a little research on Gabbard before buying into any piece of tripe that feeds your misconceptions of her. Just because it's on the internet, doesn't make it gospel.

Bbeanster's picture

I don't have to research

I don't have to research Gabbard. I've researched Assad.
Assad is a mass murderer.

Gabbard is either a willing dupe of someone who has been dropping barrel bombs on his own people for years, and has added gassing them to his repertoire, or she's something much, much worse.

And you are a fucking blowhard.

fischbobber's picture

Assad

Assad is pretty much the moral equivalent of nearly everyone else participating in the battleground that is Syria. If you believe otherwise you are an uninformed fool.

This is not news, by the way. This has been going on for the last thirty years. Where was your outrage when it would have done some good?

I'll repeat myself. Gabbard is a far more informed and educated source than you. Her personal actions and record speak to that.

I'll refrain from speaking directly to your character, but I know for a fact your positions have been born from less than ethical circumstance. I'll leave it at that.

Edit, P.S. : The Syrian pipelines have been an issue since before the first Gulf war in 1991. Saddam was using them to bypass the oil embargo imposed on Iraq after the first Gulf War throughout the Clinton Administration. Based on the battle reports from early on in the second Gulf War, securing those pipelines was the primary focus of the second Gulf war. The entire Syrian conflict is based on the flow of oil and who controls it, not human rights or religion or any of the other bullshit reasons propaganda machines are trying to get you to buy. Human beings have no moral value to these people. It's all about money and power. They are like Exxon, Trump Enterprises, ATT, British Petroleum or any other major corporation. Right or wrong have nothing to do with the way it is, and that's just the way it is.

Treehouse's picture

What do you say to this?

Bernie Sanders, in his capacity as co-chair of Democratic outreach, said flatly of Georgia Democrat Jon Ossoff: "He's not a progressive," while declaring as "progressive" Nebraska Democrat Heath Mello, despite the fact that Mello has sponsored legislation that would restrict abortion rights.After holding Ossoff to a litmus test on vaguely defined "economic issues," he gives Mello a pass on abortion rights because there are candidates "who may not agree with [him] on every issue."

cafkia's picture

Oh my Gawd! Has he

Oh my Gawd! Has he prioritized differently than do you? Might he have prioritized differently than do I? Well screw him then. From now on every thing he does and everything he has ever done is wrong, wrong, WRONG!

/sarcasm

Dude, if you are looking for someone to agree with everything someone else says or does, I am not your guy. But yes, I still like him better than damn near anyone else in national politics.

What else do you want to know?

Rachel's picture

This intra-party warfare is

This intra-party warfare is STUPID. Keep pushing to pull the party to the left, but don't do it in a way that ultimately helps Republicans by making the Democrats look hopelessly divided.

Geez, y'all.

cafkia's picture

See, that right there is the

See, that right there is the problem. A lot of Dems think that anyone that supported Bernie is really a Dem regardless of what they actually say.

My experience does not support that at all. An independent with disgust for what the reich-wing has become but less so for the mealy-mouthed and mediocre approach of the establishment Dems is NOT an automatic Dem. Party integrity is no importance to them at all.

To quote a friend of mine "Geez, y'all."

cafkia's picture

Also, one approaches the

Also, one approaches the party faithful differently than one approaches indys. You need to excite the faithful and convince the indys.

Bernie's failed effort was a bit strange because he excited the indys and failed to convince the party faithful. But when he was done, the leadership ignored what he had done. They took, and are taking, zero steps to capitalize on the excitement among independents there was for Bernie. In fact, the effort appears to be to tamp down any such excitement. That effort is an apparent runaway success.

The Dems can't win with the faithful alone. So what's next?

Tamara Shepherd's picture

*

The Dems can't win with the faithful alone. So what's next?

Progressives' "unity tour" with the Indys? There are more Indys than there are establishment Dems and progressive Dems, either one. Shoot, there are more Indys than there are Dems of both types, put together.

Really, progressives' alliance with the Indys would make for a supermajority of the electorate (like we didn't see get to participate in the Dem primary). Sure seems to me like the math needed to thwart the Repubs...

Tamara Shepherd's picture

*

More on why progressive Dems' alliance with the Indys would make for a supermajority of the (left-leaning) electorate, to include all those progressives disallowed from voting in the Dem primary, from Pew Research Center 5 Facts about America's political independents, summarized in part:

1) Independents outnumber either Dems or Repubs and most of 'em lean left (48%), not right (39%).

2) A majority of both left-leaning and right-leaning Indys cite the other party's policies being worse as the reason they lean the way they do. However, when asked why they do not identify outright with the party they lean toward, the major reason right-leaners cite is frustration with party leadership, while the major reason left-leaners cite is disagreement with the party on key issues.

Those points were especially telling, I thought, so please just look in on that link to see points three through five.

What I really wanted to share was the nugget that is the last sentence of this article, here:

When the two groups diverged in 2004, Democratic leaners (58%) were actually somewhat more likely than Democrats (46%) to be to the left of center.

And thirteen years later, the Dem Party is still bleeding voters "left of center."

We know where to find 'em. They comprise the majority of Indys, which is a pretty big bloc.

bizgrrl's picture

feel like true Progressives


feel like true Progressives were well and truly burned in the Dem presidential primary and then again in the race to chair the DNC.

establishment Dems don't see anything wrong with what was done...

many of them see Bernie as a Johnnie-come-lately usurper with pie in the sky ideas.

the establishment Dems to use the time to sharpen the knives they will plunge into the good Senator's back at the first opportunity.
...
the continuing disparagement of Progressives by the lay establishment Dems on social media
...
Establishment Dems are convinced they can balance the rightward tilt of the political scales by adding weight to the middle.

The Republicans are happy to agree with these comments. It makes it even easier for them when they run against two parties.

cafkia's picture

I'm pretty sure that

I'm pretty sure that establishment Dems agree with all of that as well. Are you saying the two parties are the same?

You can prove me wrong by showing where the establishment is making balancing proposals. Or if you can prove that all of the Sanders slams (not to mention Gabbard and Turner and other Berniecrats) are from GOPers trolling us Progressives. While you are at it, you can show that it is GOPer trolls talking trash to lay Progressives.

It really does sound as if you are saying that Progressives should not speak until they have something positive to say about the Dems and that if they can't do that, it is the fault of the Progressives and NOT the Dems. You are in good company there. As I recall, the first time BO showed anger in his presidency it was not at the GOPers that had called him everything but a child of Gawd. It was not at the racists that demeaned both sides of his family. Instead it was at the Progressives that thought he should toss us a bone from time to time.

I am a bit curious why there is not greater appreciation of Sanders for not starting his own party. He could have done so and had an immediate impact. Obviously 3rd parties have a dismal history in this nation but the Sanders phenomenon is/was unprecedented as far as I can recall. It could well be that in two or three election cycles, the party could be a real force.

It is rare that a whole day goes by that I do not read or hear something from a purported Dem (so far, always a lay Dem) that is either an overt or implicit suggestion for that very thing, that Sanders should leave or be kicked out of the Dems and start his own party. I seriously do not understand why.

bizgrrl's picture

Can't say that I agree

Can't say that I agree establishment Dems feel the same. I'm not aware of this dissing of Sanders, but I don't do much, if any, social networking. I'm glad Sanders is still in the Senate and fighting the good fight.

bizgrrl's picture

I've moved on past Clinton,

I've moved on past Clinton, ready for Senate, House, local races.

cafkia's picture

Say something positive about

Say something positive about Sanders or most any other Berniecrat and you will likely hear plenty dissing. All I have is my experience but I get around, especially digitally. Establishment Dems that I encounter sound like they are offended that someone would challenge the queen whose turn it was to be POTUS dammitt.

No, I'm not exaggerating.

fischbobber's picture

Issues that bind......

At the core of this dissension is a rejection of the Democratic faithful of the issues that bind progressives, Democrats, independents, and crossover Republicans.

1) Living wage. Clinton's rejection of the living wage cost her over the board but hit her particularly hard in the rust belt. We left the convention thinking she was committed to 15 dollars an hour only to find out she double-crossed us and cut it to 12. That didn't help her negative ratings amongst those concerned with her trustworthiness.

2) Pension reform/bailouts. Clinton has hopped right on the Republican train of hand-wringing and having sympathy for the poor victims of Goldman Sachs and their government overseers, but really, "What can we do?" She has treated pensions like an entitlement that we have no investment in, rather than the earned benefit that is owed, which is what it is. She is selling the big lie that defined benefit retirement is unreasonable. It isn't. You just can't have fund managers constantly trying to hit monthly and quarterly goals.

3) Education. Taxpayers, particularly the poor in this state fund our state educational institutions, yet finances are crippling our children's opportunities to go to college. Parents are forced to choose between funding a childhood, scouting, sports, music, and various academic extracurricular activities, or saving for school that the child may or may not use at college age. All students who show ability and drive should have a right to education and/or vocational training, including tradesmen, artists, musicians, poets, writers and philosophers. Teachers should be mandated a professional wage.

4) Healthcare Regardless of what anyone says, in order for America to afford a working healthcare system we must move to a single payer system. In spite of Clinton's claims, Obamacare is not the answer. It was merely a small step in the right direction.

5) Social Security, Medicare reform, infrastructure maintenance and upgrades, parks, greenways, preschool education, childcare, and a host of other middle class social issues.

6) Wall Street and bank reform. Clinton's plans were nearly always skewed to the banks and brokerage house, when the reality was that the citizens were the ones in need of a level playing field.

The list goes on and if you'll notice, these are all issues Trump railed about without offering solutions to, while Clinton soft-pedaled them to corporate friendly solutions. Where were the plans for the working class? We were sold out by both parties.

R. Neal's picture

Bla bla bla bla bla bla James

Bla bla bla bla bla bla

James Comey.

Bla bla bla bla bla bla

Tamara Shepherd's picture

*

Brian Beutler had an interesting column on the "unity tour" (which he observed wasn't doing much to unify) in the New Republic on Thursday.

His closing paragraph:

...there is perhaps only one person in Democratic politics with the right track record to unite the party—someone experienced enough to be president, progressive enough to avoid a left-wing backlash, and who, critically, remained neutral in last year’s Democratic primary. Perhaps it’s no surprise that Reid has encouraged Senator Elizabeth Warren to run for president, too.

Warren certainly works for me but I've noted an almost universal hatred of her online among many Sanders supporters. They take exception that she never endorsed Sanders and also that she ultimately endorsed Clinton, if only after the Convention.

I have to part company with my fellow Sanders peeps on that score.
Seems to me that the Warren "endorsement" of the candidate already nominated really didn't constitute an "endorsement" at all.

(This group wants Gabbard, you may know. Maybe I'm just old, but my first thought on Gabbard's possible candidacy--Assad aside--is that she's too young. But I'm rambling. Do read that article.)

cafkia's picture

I'm with you. I like Gabbard

I'm with you. I like Gabbard as an advisor. I would be very happy if HI decided to make her a Senator. But I'm not sure she is quite ready for the big dance. Same with Nina Turner. They need to be in the mix but given my druthers, they would get a bit more real world experience.

I'm not sure the establishment Dems are going to afford them the luxury. Sanders may yet end up having to splinter the left polity and essentially form his own party. Of course, if he does that, all the Dems who are trying to push him away will be the loudest complainers about him being a spoiler. It is another one of those things I would like to be wrong about but I seriously doubt that I am.

In any case, I think that Warren could actually get support from the Progressives especially if she chose wisely for her VP. The establishment Dems would get a taste of their own medicine in that they would have no where else to go.

I don't know exactly where but Tammy Duckworth might well end up playing a large role as well.

fischbobber's picture

My guess

My guess is that most serious progressive political junkies are in the same camp as you and Tamara, (I count myself in with y'all). I see Gabbard as a rising star whose time has yet to come. Her blue collar rise through the ranks via her military and groundswell political activities are not necessarily suited tho a rock star rise like Obama's. Senate, and White House senior advisor/cabinet would be a great next step.

I like a combo Warren/Sanders ticket and I don't really care who is President and who is Vice President. I like Joe Biden as well. Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a cancer to the party and anyone she supports or who seeks her support. The single biggest factor in Clinton's loss was DWS mismanagement of the party. She needs to go. I've got no use for someone controlled by the payday loan industry.

cafkia's picture

I'm not sure about the

I'm not sure about the Warren/Sanders ticket. Duckworth has significant Asian heritage and Hispanics really need to be represented at the executive level. OTOH, Sanders attracts Independents and previous non-participants like pretty much no one ever. If the Progressives are to be involved, it will need to be a very progressive ticket.

I like Joe but he is awfully tied to BO. I see him as more of an Ambassador-at-large.

The world is changing technically, physically, and politically. The time of the neolibs is past. I see no reason to demonize Clinton and her crew but I also see no reason to involve them or seek their counsel.

fischbobber's picture

The horizon.....

It's a bit early to dig heels in, and I'm impressed with Duckworth as well. I'm not sure where the answers lie.

I'm not quite convinced that Biden would be forced to compromise near as much as Obama was. America is still a racist nation, but even racist constituents will give more leeway to one they view as their own than one they view in a prejudicial manner. I'm not proud of this character streak of our nation, but, from a pragmatic view, Joe may be the best choice to get the nation turned. I could be wrong, but it certainly bears consideration.

My gut says Warren. I believe you're right about her uniting the party with the progressives.

2020 is still a ways out though and lots could happen between now and then.

cafkia's picture

I should point out that I am

I should point out that I am nowhere near ready to give up on the Castro twins. Joaquín is apparently shaping up to give Ted Cruz a serious run for his Senate seat. Julian got his name out there some and I still think he was the obvious choice for VP if HRC had been serious about winning. Kamala Harris should also be on the watch list.

You say it is a long way off but, in truth the vetting of serious candidates for the top offices, cabinet positions and SC needs to already be underway. Whether we are talking Dems or a Progressive 3rd party, we do not need to give the GOP a gift of a candidate with easily exploitable flaws.

Tamara Shepherd's picture

*


I think that Warren could actually get support from the Progressives especially if she chose wisely for her VP.

I've been reading further on this topic tonight, in Paste magazine (Elizabeth Warren's Fall from Grace: From Darling of the Party to Progressive Pariah) and in Boston magazine (Elizabeth Warren Among Top 10 Most Unpopular Senators in America), both articles appearing just this month.

Ouch. That latter article says it was Morning Consult's poll of 85,000 voters that determined her ranking as 9th most *unpopular* senator (and that also determined Sanders' ranking as 1st most *popular* senator).

Yeah, it's a bit early yet, but if Harry Reid is looking for a party unifier, he may have to put in another quarter and try again, sigh.

fischbobber's picture

Flaws

I agree there. I will be watching as early entrants put forth their platforms. I do hope that we on the left don't fall into the trap of shooting ourselves in the foot by rushing to judgement on any of the bizarre events I fear this administration will bring.

Tamara Shepherd's picture

*

cafkia's picture

The problem is in what he

The problem is in what he does not say. With only two significant parties, the failure of one means the probable failure of the democracy. The GOP is fine with that as authoritarianism is the goal they constantly work towards. But that is not necessarily the goal of the rank and file GOPer. The insistence of the Democrats on sticking with a 1970s model party structure and operation in the rapidly changing current and future world is causing the death of democracy. And many are desperately fighting Bernie to let it die.

I honestly feel like I am watching people line up double file to jump into a meat grinder with sign-age along every foot of the lines detailing what awaits them if they stay in line. The only thing that seems to upset those in the queues is that there is a small percentage of folks that won't get in line.

Tamara Shepherd's picture

*


The insistence of the Democrats on sticking with a 1970s model party structure...

One minor point of information here, if I may: The Dem Party created superdelegates in the 1980s. Okay, so it's a largely irrelevant point. Thirty years behind the curve, 40 years behind the curve, what's the difference, I guess...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is used to make sure you are a human visitor and to prevent spam submissions.

style="display:block"
data-ad-format="autorelaxed"
data-ad-client="ca-pub-3296520478850753"
data-ad-slot="5999968558">

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

News Sentinel

State News

Local .GOV

State .GOV

    Wire Reports

    Lost Medicaid Funding

    To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

    Search and Archives