Howard Dean is to Rahm Emanual as

____________ is to Richard Gere.

Sorry, I am developing a new SAT of political litteracy, as the old words like Checks and balances can no longer carry the water of reality.

The Dollar must fall
For the
Amero
To raise.

Knowing the Republicans to be duplicitous, self serving bastards, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if some of the above comments were planted by Republicans. Remember that old WWII poster, "Our Enemies are Listening"? Well today they'd be posting online, disguised as disgruntled Progressives.

"I DON'T GIVE A DAMN IF A REPUBLICAN GETS ELECTED INSTEAD OF A DEMOCRAT. The differences are so tiny as to be minute."

If you will not admit that if Al Gore were elected in 2000, or Kerry in 2004, that this entire planet would be way, way better off than we are today, you either are not paying attention or are blinded by your infuriation with the Democrats (which I can completely sympathize with but is something you have to snap out of because it's making you irrational.)

You really cannot believe that, can you? Honestly?

Indeed, the Dems have a long way to go, and opposing forces are not sitting by idly -- they're vying for control, toe to toe, day in and day out. That's the way life works. We have to join them in battle for the soul of the party. I know you'd rather have a third party, but until we get control of this one, the changes required to make that viable are never, ever going to happen.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news and you can call me whatever names you want for bringing it to you, but I don't make the world, I just try to do what I can to influence it. Unlike you, the last thing I want to see is more Republicans in office.

While people sat around just watching for lo all those long years you bemoan, all they did was bitch about the situation instead of doing something about it. That's makes for a self-fulfilling prophecy. Then, all frstrated and pissed off because someone else didn't do what they wanted, they go into the voting booth and vote to advance the Republican agenda and pat themselves on the back for following their conscience because they withheld a vote from a Democrat. And what we all get for that pollyannish idealism is this criminal administration. I'd have taken an alternative criminal administration that would have kept us out of Iraq for starters, and work on it from there.

The fact is, doing the best thing to support one's values is not absolute. It's always a choice based on consequences and context. That too is the way life works.

"If you want change, you ain't gonna get it from the Democrats. If you want change and you vote Democrat, you are wasting your vote. The only way to get change is to STOP VOTING DEMOCRAT."

Then you might as well vote Republican. That's not just one person's opinion, that's a fact.

Hey, I don't like the Democrats either. But this is not the way to change anything. It's false on it's face: doing the best thing to support one's values is never an absolute: it's always a matter of choices, and those choices always depend on consequences.

I think the most effective way to change anything is to get involved at the grassroots level -- bottom up -- and take control of the Democratic Party back from the corporations instead of just standing back and bitching about things.

Once the candidates are on the ballot, it's too late -- Republicans must be blocked. The key is to make sure those candidates represent true American values that we here represent.

(well, maybe -- I wonder sometimes if the RNC is posting some of this advice for people to throw away their votes, the same way they orchestrated campaign donations for Nader in 2004. Hey, don't scream at me: that's precisely what happened. We criticize right wingers for not living in a reality-based universe -- some of us should take our own advice.)

Seeking immediate gratification, our natural tendency is to attack the problem from the top-down, and that gives us disasters like George Bush. So don't throw your vote away: the planet cannot endure eight years of Giuliani. But DO run for office, DO gather together a group of like-minded people and take control of your local Democratic Party, and do all the things you can where the rubber meets the road.

It's going to take years of hard work. But remember, the Christo-fascists under Falwell and Robertson did exactly that with the Republicans, and it took twenty years to leverage a small minority of kooks into exerting major control of that party which lasts to this very day. And we, who I claim are not leftists but we are in fact the true centrists, we are the majority of political thought in this country, so our numbers are much much greater -- and so are our prospects. Besides, we know that the people in the party now are a bunch of fools who take their power for granted -- storming the barricades should be easy.

In fact, it's happening now: every time you hear in the media that the "radical left" is taking over the party, you know that's a victory for restoring our nation to sanity. This is the same media that called opposition to the Iraq occupation a radical leftist position also, making nearly 70 percent of the country so-called radical leftists.

And on the other hand, KKK Karl says the Dems dispise W because he exudes "middle class".

I have never seen our country in so much trouble. The right is malignant cancer on its soul.

Its going to be either us, or them.

Pray its us, there can't be enough dumb asses, redneck bigots and billionaires in this country to elect any of the candidates on the right in 08, can there?

"Dean thinks the lawmakers have not been given enough credit for increasing the minimum wage to $5.85 and for enacting ethics reforms bringing lobbyists into line."

$5.85, for the minimum wage? The only thing worse than taking credit for that was to have voted agains this measley raise.

Great assessment Helen.

what if the party with the best hackers wins again ?? ughhhhhhh ... third times not the charm.

The latest Reuters/Zogby poll showed that Bush is nearly twice as popular as Congress.

Bush wins a positive job rating from 58% of Republicans, 29% of independents, and 11% of Democrats.

Meanwhile, Congress wins just 18% positive approval from Democrats, and 12% from the Republicans, and 16% from indies.

Democrats suck. Give them a mandate, and they snatch failure from the jaws of victory.

Dean is in the dark.

America doesn't care about Katrina.
$5.85 is an insult.
Under 30 vote??? Are the Dems going to hang their hats on the smallest voting segment in an election? Hope not.

Earth to Dean: It was the War and the promise of Impeachment that gave the Dems the advantage in '06 and they blew that advantage with the first war funding bill they passed.

It will take more than empty promises in '08.

Republicans will win the presidency. That is near certain. Hillary will be the Democratic nominee, with the help of the corporate media, and she will lose to whatever Republican, also with the help of the corporate media. There are dozens of stories, if not hundreds, the media can choose to broadcast about any candidate, and there are a great many possible interpretations of the data points. For now almost all coverage of Hillary is positive (e.g.: "She is ahead by 20 plus points, she has won all the debates, and she appears tough. I don't think anyone can beat her.") After she gets the nomination, almost all coverage will be negative (e.g.: "She has the highest negatives of any nominee ever, voters just do not trust her, and Americans are sick of electing people based on family relations, so I do not see how she can win.")

I doubt the Soviet citizens had any less democracy than what we have in the US today.

Democrats are a JOKE.
Too bad it's not funny.

The Democrats were elected to get us out of Iraq. Instead they have caved in to every demand made by Bush to continue funding the war.

The Democrats were elected to curb the excesses of Bush and co. Instead they have taken impeachment off the table, and just gave Bush more power to spy on us so that they could go on vacation.

The Democrats did pass an inadequate raise of the minimum wage coupled with more tax breaks for businesses in a time when we are having to borrow money from China and the rest of the world to finance not only our economy, but Bushes illegal war in Iraq.

Now tell me why I should vote for a Democrat in 2008.

Lobo Gris

Sugarsmacks, you are so right that Dean is completely in the dark! Rember him (before the scream) talking about the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party? What happened to that point of view? Not yet 2 years in Washington and he's completely delusional and out of touch.

The repubs are evil lying scum and the dems just make me sick, what a choice. Dean gets paid well to be out of touch, sad isn't it?

the Dems have already lost my support for failing to uphold the constitutional requirement to impeach those in office that commit crimes, and for violating the constitution by allowing a lying scumbag like Torture Boy Gonales to wiretap anyone he wants to.

The Dems have shown that their only REAL objection to the Bush Criminality Campaign is that they are not geting enough of the profits.

Dean is nothing more than a tactic of the DLC. They drag him out to placate when they bend over for Bush, but its too transparent to work anymore.

Why did both the 1988 Jesse jackson campaign

and the Dean campaign lead to NOTHING? In other words the party still moved to the right, and it didnt influence what the DLC Bendovercrats said or did at all

Its becoming clear that Jackson-Dean was just a PR campaign to fool the base. Learn from history.

Dean's right - and he didn't even mention the Dems habit of killing their own opportunities every chance they get. Rove will for sure be running the smear and fear public relations department for whatever GOPathological is deemed dictator-worthy. Which, combined with E-vote rigging, caging lists, phone-bank jamming, and whatever other dirty deeds KR's got up his dough-boy sleeves, means the Dems are a 50-50 bet at best. 10-90 to the Rs if the nom is HRC or BO, cause both are easy targets for the KR shotgun, not to mention wholly wrong for what America needs today.

Dr. Ron Paul. Dennis Kucinich. The rest are a gimme to the GOPussies.

A little schadenfreude on my head that I agree with most of the posters above. I'm just waiting to see how the Dems screw it up. What form will the character assassinations take, and what will the target Dem NOT do about it? A better question: who will be our next president, Romney or Ghouliani?

Today in the mail I received a survey and request for a donation to the Democratic Party. A long time ago I had asked them to remove my name and they failed to do so(no surprise). So, I did not fill out the survey, included a pointed note viscerally attacking the Party, and mailed it (amazingly they covered the cost of postage). Just doing part of my duty as a citizen to protect the Constitution.

Dr Dean, what do the Democrats have to be remotely overconfident about?

I got a fundraiser mailing today from the DNC. I sent it back asking them to remove me from their mailing list along with some other pithy comments.

Why? Well, we voted the Dems into power in '06 and Nothing Changed! Why should we vote them in again in '08?

COMarc, you have hit the nail on the head!
I'm sick of the Dems singing "anything you can do I can do better." The problem is not just that the Repubs under Bush are comically incompetent. They certainly are. But just complaining about their incompetence misses the point entirely.

The song the Dems should be singing is "we don't want to do a better job than you because what you do is WRONG"
It's time for the whole philosophy of Conservatism to be attacked for what it is: The organisation of Government to defend people who are perfectly capable of defending themselves. It's a philisophical justification for greed, arrogance and PRIVELEGE and it's been a complete failure (for most of us) going all the way back to that bastard, Reagan.

If the Dems would start campaigning on that I might return to the fold. Don't bet on it. And don't tell me about Kucinich. Wittingly or not he is there to keep hope alive in the Dem base that someday, maybe, if we are patient, they might nominate an acceptable candidate.

These goofs seem to think they can win by pissing off their base, moving to the right and replacing left wing defectors with evangelicals and the youth vote. Ha!!!!
Cindy Sheehan for Congress. Nancy, your re-election is Off The Table!

Have no fears, the Democrats have already shown themselves to be fools. After all, they've been suckered into a campaign for an election more than a year away, providing so much fodder for the Republican machine that the right wing return to power is virtually assured. Predictably, the media is already having a field day, feasting greedily on the retards running for office while they happily count their profits.

Over confidence? What's the approval rating of the Democratic Congress these days? Isn't it down in Cheney territory? Face it, Americans are as pissed at the Democrats as they are at the Republicans.

Its not about the Dems 'screwing it up'. Its about the Dems being so completely friggin out of touch with what people want that the polls rate them right with those other perpetual out-of-touchers like Cheney.

The entire Dem debate that I see and hear is amazing. Its like they are on another planet. Our jobs are going overseas in droves, the dollar is crashing, food prices are climbing at a 10% to 15% inflation rate that the CPI is rigged not to see, and our kids are getting killed in the Army because the Army is the only freaking job left that's open to them. Yet the Dems are arguing about who's going to be the most aggressive in starting yet another war in Pakistan.

Since the Dems can't seem to make themselves really give a damn about the people of this country, I hope they get their rears kicked in the next election. I know I'm damn sure not voting for ANY Democrats unless that party is massively different than today. And since the party isn't democratic, and since its rigged such that the leaders of the party do whatever they want, I don't see much sign of that party changing anytime soon.

Meanwhile, Don Kucinich charges at another windmill.

To me, Katrina shows either how clueless the Democrats are, or how tied they are to the basic Republican agenda they are.

Katrina to me is the poster case for what's wrong with the very core ideas of Republicanism. The Republican philosophy is that everyone is on their own. The Republicans believe its actually wrong for the government to help people.

Katrina shows what's wrong with that. The people with SUVs and credit cards can evacuate to hotels in land. The people without are left behind in the Superdome or clinging to a rooftop. The rebuilding focuses on commercial development and on property owners. With an extra racist drive to keep the poor blacks from coming back to the city.

So, like I said, to me Katrina is the poster case for what's wrong with the very core idea in the Republican philosophy. To me, we all can run into crisis that are more than a person can handle on their own. So to me that's when we need the concepts of collective action and people working as a society to solve a problem.

Under Republicanism, we are eventually destined to find ourselves on a rooftop with a sign begging someone to help us. That's a strong image to plant in people 's minds. Its a fatal attack right at the very core of Republican philosophy. Its the sort of attack that has the potential to change the American political landscape for a generation to come.

And the Democrats won't make the attack. They tread softly around the edges. They talk about the incompetence of the Bush officials, but they won't attack the core principle. To me, that tells me the Democrats are just fine with the same basic principle and don't want to see it attacked. Which is why I'm pretty disgusted with the Democrats these days.

The key point about Dean is that the chairman of the Democratic Party is required to act like Dean is acting. In order to get the job, he had to give up his outsider notions and his talk about the "Democratic wing of the Democratic party." In order to get his current job, he had to buy into the programs of the people with the money that really run the Democratic party. Same with Pelosi. I don't care how progressive any of these people were before they sold out and took their current high positions. Its inherent in taking the high position that they have to sell out their previous stands and beliefs.

PS... the line about "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" was originally Sen. Paul Wellstone's line. From him it was highly believable, as he had a strong core of beliefs that he didn't hide and always stood behind and fought for. With Dean, you never knew where he stood, and it always seemed anyways he was saying what the latest pollsters said. So I was never very impressed when he stole this line and I was never convinced he really ever meant it like Wellstone did. Now we know he didn't.

"what if the party with the best hackers wins again ?? ughhhhhhh … third times not the charm."

Do you know any self-respecting, talented hackers who would stoop to calling themselves Democrats? Good hackers tend to be smart independent people. About the dead opposite of a Democrat supporter on both counts because to me the people who continue to vote Democrat are best described as stupid sheep. I doubt there are many good hackers who are also Democrats.

"The fact is they are not proposing to stay in Iraq," he said, but acknowledged that the U.S. may keep a "special operations force in the region for years."

Goddamn Howard, can you not get one sentence in between contradictions?

Unless we employ Iranian Revolutionary Guards to oversee the election, and we all get behind Kucinich, we may as well just crown the current imbeciles King/Jesters and get on with the rapture...

And by the way, I agree with Comarc, the Republicats do believe we should all pull ourselves up by our bootstraps. They think like Barbara Bush, that the Katrina victims were lucky to be able to spend a few days in the Super Dome, and that helping citizens only hinders their growth and capability to help themselves.

So with that in mind, I will continue to say, let's allow them to pull up their own fuckin' bootstraps by refusing to donate our hard earned money, labor, loyal consumerism and hope.

In the words of Roger Waters...

When the cowboys and Arabs draw down
On each other at noon
In the cool dusty air of the city boardroom
Will you stand by a passive spectator
Of the market dictators
Will you discreetly withdraw
With your ear pressed to the boardroom door
Will you hear when the lion within you roars
Will you take to the hills

A succession of three landmark events proved that the Democrats were no better than the GOP.

- The first: "Impeachment is off the table."

- The second: John Conyers' cowardly position on Impeachment--and concomitant arrest of Cindy Sheehan--on July 23rd.

- The third: The approval of BushCo's latest constitution-shredding spy law on the eve of Congressional recess for late summer.

These three events are why the Congressional Democrats' poll numbers are dropping like a rock. These three events are why they have blown it in eight months. If they lose unexpectedly in 2008, which Dean seems to be sensing here, these three betrayals will be the reason why.

That the petty crooks also mostly support the war under the table is more icing for the GOP cake.

RE: THINGS TO COME

COMarc August 16th, 2007 5:15 pm
"Under Republicanism, we are eventually destined to find ourselves on a rooftop with a sign begging someone to help us. That's a strong image to plant-"

Yea, especially since we know how the right deals with the helpless...

RE: THINGS TO COME cont.

COMarc August 16th, 2007 5:15 pm
"Under Republicanism, we are eventually destined to find ourselves on a rooftop with a sign begging someone to help us. That's a strong image to plant-"

'Oh my GOD, Dad - you SOLD me into indentured SERVITUDE?'
'Well, you see, son - the water was rising, and there was this man with a motorboat, life vests and contracts...'

Minimum wage raise. Big deal. What about impeachment, you wimps? And where, oh where, is there a John F. Kennedy among the Democratic hopefuls? Or an FDR or Harry Truman? You had your chance after the 2006 election and have done virtually nothing, except turn off the faithful. Losers all, from Pelosi on down.

Am I the only one who sees a problem with all the Democratic Party front runners being senators or former senators?
The last senator to be ELECTED president was John Kennedy in 1960.
The neocon propaganda machine excels at taking candidates' senate voting records and converting them into weapons that the candidates can not defend against. You can bet that the machine will work even better in 2008 than it did in 2004.
Please tell me why I should take Howard Dean and the DNC seriously when they don't understand Campaign Startegy 1A?

Stilba wonders who the next President will be, Romney or Guilliani.

Well, just take a look at who Romney's new "campaign adviser" is:

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/23/1541229

Here's Romney with five strapping sons and when asked about whether any of them plan to join the military he said, "No. They feel that working to get me elected President is enough to serve their country." Then he chooses the guy who owns "Blackwater, Inc. Mercenaries/Soldiers of Fortune Our Us" as his campaign manager.

If I wrote this stuff into a screenplay the big producers would say, "All this isn't plausible!" Ha!!!!

"Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, is warning Democrats not to be too overconfident about their election prospects in 2008."

Your damn straight! With the job they've been doing they best not be overconfident.

Actually, Dean is absolutely right. Before Katrina, Bush's approval ratings were still reasonably high, and nobody in mainstream media questioned anything that came out of the Oval Office. After Katrina, Bush's ratings started sliding down and the MSM started giving us the other side of the story: the corruption side, the don't-give-a-s***-about-anyone-who-isn't-rich side, the secure-the-oil-in-Iraq-and-the-Caspian-at-all-costs side.

And the "democratic wing of the Democratic party" was a line he stole from Paul Wellstone, God rest his soul.

But Katrina isn't that important anymore. Iraq is the big issue, and the economy and civil liberties come next. I think a Democrat can win the next presidential election IF it isn't stolen again. And honestly, even Hillary would be a big improvement. Under her husband, recall, we didn't get involved in any military quagmires, the improved economy tremendously, acts of terrorism were prevented, civil liberties were mostly left alone, and the Kyoto Protocol was signed. Yeah, we could do a whole lot better, and a Kucinich presidency would be a gift from heaven. But we could also have more of same, which would be a whole lot worse than ANYTHING else.

COMarc, you're on a roll! As for the presidency, we're going to be stuck with a gangster or a religious freak. And chickenhawks all. But if the public decides the Democrats won't get us out of Iraq or do anything else they promised to do what's the difference who gets elected? And yes, the Republicans are all set to steal the next election and the Democrats are making it easy for them by being so unattractive.

This country is going down.

Dean's 50 state strategy is a force pushing the party to the left. Contact with the grassroots is the only hope to build a party with progressive principles.

Unfortunately corporations, triangulation and the party geniuses that keep losing elections are all shoving right.

If the 50 state strategy is dropped the republicans will be even stronger.

FDR's, JFK's and RFK's Democratic party no longer exists. The Democrats and the Republicans are now two ends of a corporate spectrum of our politics and economy. Do not fall for the "take over the party at the grassroots...then make the party progressive" crap. We need a 2nd Republic.

I think the democrats have crippled their own chance for survival for turning their backs on their constitutional duty. HB-333 now! Kucinich, bail out of the party before its too late. America is ready for you to go indy. To the others in your party, talk about tripping over your dick....jeez!

The Democrats never had a chance -- and we've posted elsewhere before. Reagan was a Democrat, they were once a prohibition and segregationist party prior to the bolting of the Dixiecrats. Then there was some hanky-panky with JFK's assassination, and the Tonkin incident that got us into Vietnam. Today it's only a gross mistake that we see them as a vehicle of "liberal" or "progressive" change.

Of course a progressive or two has squeaked into that party, and one might still make the argument that it is the easiest target for a progressive takeover, but it may well be that both of the corporate parties need to be targeted.

Gawdalmighty! Sometimes I wonder why I even bother reading the comments on a site such as Common Dreams. While I am a life-long-leftie, I sure am getting sick and tired of all you quitters, bitching and moaning about how there is no difference in the two major parties.

Where I live, DEMOCRATS are very active at the local and state level and we are making great headway -- our city and county governments and school boards were trending to the right, but now is shifting (steadfastly) to the left, thanks in part, to the horrible policies of the Repugs at the national level.

For godsakes, Democratic governors in some of the reddest states are succeeding. Why? Because they have good policies, common sense for the common good. If these governors had a Democratic president in the WH, think of the changes that could be made! (Hint: there won't be a 3rd party president, so do you want to be GUARANTEED OF MORE OF THE SAME AND HAND IT TO A REPUBLICAN SO THAT YOU CAN BE SCREWED AGAIN???)

If you think there is no difference in the parties, YOU ARE A PART OF THE PROBLEM.

"While Democratic members of Congress caved in and went along with President Bush's plan to expand eavesdropping of Americans without a court warrant, Dean thinks the lawmakers have not been given enough credit for increasing the minimum wage to $5.85 and for enacting ethics reforms bringing lobbyists into line."

Wow! After working 40 hours a person can now earn a whopping $234. per week. Well, considering that the national average to rent an apartment for a family is around $600-$700 per month (without rat infestation if you're lucky) and utilities (depending where you live) are averaging about $150, that would leave the earner anywhere from $86 - $186 to buy food, clothes, shoes, hygiene products, transportation, dental and medical care, etc..for their family.

I wouldn't exactly celebrate over this pittance, especially when Congress distributes extravagant raises to its own members almost every year. No sacrifices there!

Secondly, if they truly "reformed ethics and brought lobbyists into line", the minimum wage might actually become a living wage.

I am just curious...how many times do the Democrats need to "screw up" before we start questioning if these transgressions are really screw ups at all? From my point of view, the Democrats are simply a buffer to ensure elite control of the country and to preclude a middle class/working class revolution.

Chomsky always refers to the siamese twins of plutocracy as the "two factions of the business party."

We need to stop having illusions about the true nature of the Democracts. Their name can be correctly characterized as orwellian because their agenda is to marginalize the people who have to get up everyday and work for a living. Their mission statment should begin "to subvert the democratic process..."

Forgive me but their whole we-didn't-mean-to-screw-you-but-we-just-couldn't-help-ourselves apologetics is tired and it makes me ill.

It's nice to see a lot of people are waking up to the BS..

"I sure am getting sick and tired of all you quitters, bitching and moaning about how there is no difference in the two major parties."

Micki,

There is a difference between Coke and Pepsi as well but I don't drink either of them.

So there are some decent Dems at the local level? Wow. I'm sure there are some good souls out there who are deluded enough into being Democrats. But the problem is that they'll never rise high in the party, and the top of the party will never listen to them. The top of the party is under tight control and nobody I'm going to like or support is ever getting into that club without selling out their soul first.

I live in one of those Red states that have some statewide people with (D) after their name. First thing you have to know is that the Democratic Party is very undemocratic in Colorado. The party goes to extreme lengths to make sure there are no primaries. Instead candidates are chosen by the party leaders in a back room and then announced. The candidates chosen are always basically Republicans.

The two statewide people with (D)s after their name that have gotten elected are Ken Salazar as Senator and Witter as Governor. Salazar is a dependable corporate and Republican vote. He's one of the (D)s who just voted yes to give Bush expanded spying powers. That's a very typical vote for him. He's also part of the gang of 7 that blocked the Dems from filibustering judges and ensured that the most extreme of Bush's judicial nominations sailed through into the courts.

Witter is a pro-life, pro-death penalty former DA. He was a bad DA in Denver. And he hasn't done much as governor. One of the first things he did was veto a bill the labor unions were counting on. And he's been a big part of arranging that this will be one of the first Democratic conventions held in a convention center and with hotels which aren't uninonized. Frankly, I can't think of a single thing he's done as governor that's made me sit and go "wow, its great having a Democrat as governor."

So, whoop-de-doo. If you get off counting the number of governors or senators with a (D) after their name, I guess its a big deal. If you are a party hack and getting a (D) elected means a patronage job for you, I guess you like it. But if you want change, what you realize is that you just elected a right-wing republican as a Senator and at best a moderate republican as governor, even though both have (D)s after their name. But the key point is, if electing Democrats doesn't make a difference. If it doesn't lead to change. Then why the heck should I care if the Republicans win or the Democrats win?

The Democrats spin this myth that all the problems lie with the Republicans. They do it by attacking the whole party. They do it by trying to act that the whole problem lies in Rove or Bush or other individuals. But the big lie is to hide that the Democrats have approved of virtually everything Bush and the Republicans have done. Most stuff passes with Democratic votes. This year stuff like the expanded spy powers for Bush bill and the bill that backed big pharma over the ability of Americans to get cheaper meds both passed with the full approval of the congressional leadership. Remember that the leadership of each house determines which bills even make it to the floor for a vote. Reid or Pelosi could have made it very hard for these sorts of bills to pass with just by saying no and controlling the agenda.

And the real killer is that the rules of the Senate let 41 Senators stop dang near anything they want. There have always been more than 41 Dems in the Senate. So that tells you that the Democrats have always had the ability to stop anything Bush has done. They can stop in nominations. They can stop his bills. They can stop his funding. That's been true every single year of the Bush administration. Basically, the Democrats have approved every single thing Bush has done.

See through the myth everyone. The Democratic party is built on the big lie. The big lie is that they are the opposition. They are not. They don't oppose what has been happening. If Hillary or Obama or Edwards gets elected, it will be just like the Clinton years. You'll see the Democrats protecting the Republican gains in these 8 years by not making any effort to roll back Republican policies. You'll be told that its not the time to be divisive so there won't be any investigations or charges against members of the Bush administration. The Dems will protect them and make sure they don't go to jail. You'll see the Democrats suddenly advancing bills even the Republicans couldn't pass. That's the Bill, Hillary and Al Gore record on WTO, NAFTA, and Welfare Reform. And the first anti-terrorism laws that started taking our rights. And the introduction of a federal death penalty. Just like the Bill, Hillary and Al show, they'll support terrorists overseas and launch illegal wars and attacks on other countries.

The Dems will occasionally toss us a scrap bone from the table that the Rethugs won't. But that's the only difference. With the Dems you get a little of the scraps and with the Rethugs you won't get any. But if you think that all that food and drink on the table is the fruit of our labors and that maybe we should be the ones getting more than the occasional scrap, then neither Dem nor Rethug is the answer.

If you want change, you ain't gonna get it from the Democrats. If you want change and you vote Democrat, you are wasting your vote. The only way to get change is to STOP VOTING DEMOCRAT.

OK. 46 comments so far at this writing and though I haven't read every one (It was too depressing) my guess is they are running about 80-90% anti-Democrats.
So I have to ask: Who are you? Are you Republicans? Do yo work for Rove? The tone of most of the comments is "Don't vote for the Democrats". So who do you propose we vote for in this two party system? And don't suggest a third party because we are not coincidentally but quite deliberately a two party system. The Founders didn't set it up this way to keepo out alternative or extreme and revolutionary views, but to force them into a compromise that would result in the "greatest food for the greatest number" I believe the expression is.

I see a litttle support for Kucinich, but the few that say so seem resigned to the fact that he will remain at the back of the pack and lose. He probaly will. Of course you blame the Corporate Media for that. I see your point but don't agree. Some here on other streams have called the media a "Coporate Whore" that does the bidding of the Corporatocracy. I don't know. I think they are just a garden variety whore who will do anything to sell papers or airtime, i.e. make a buck. (So are Coporations by the way.)

I think if Kucinich was story that captured the imagination of a braoder cross section of maericans, he would et the covereage he needs. I don't think it was impossible. I just believe he and his supporters didn't want to get ideologically "dirtied up" in ugly consensus politics.

Some of you seem to be suggesting they have fixed it so Clinton is the front runner, will fix it so she is the (easily beaten) nominee and then ingeniously fix it by switching their strategy from pro-Hillary to anti-Hillary so that she will lose to Rudy or Mitt. Hmmm. That plays iÅŸnt that whole "Hillary is the Republicans' favorite candidate" scenario. That one puzzles me. I mean all this anti-Hillary slander they are waiting to drop on her, haven't they done all that for the past ... 12 years or so? Is there something really scandalous out there that hasn't been written about?

So are you resigned to Rudy as President? Is that OK with you? I mean I know you don't like it but you all seem perfectly resigned to the inevitability of either him or Romney? That's OK? I can't understand you. You must be well off, have tenure, have no health problems, live in a neighborhood with clen water and pure air, be young and have no thoughts about growing old, getting sick or retiring ... and needless to say you have no relatives in the US military, no fears that the next war will most certainly trigger a draft, no concerns about the millions of people who suffer our planetary arrogance, our military hubris and our social / cultural cluenessness.

This malaise is the disease that precedes Facsim kids. Not the "Control of the Media" nor the overwheleming military force, but people able to lay down and let the tanks roll over them. People who fight back do so with anything they've got: sticks, rocks and bottles filled with burning gasoline. In our case, it might just be the Democrats. Don't like them? Change them. Run for office. Find a candidate you like and support him or her for the years it will take to get them on the national stage. Contribute your time and money and be dilgent until you've made a difference.

But in the meantime, fight with the weapons you've got and that means Democrats: Obama. Edwards, even Hillary - then kick them in the ass every day to keep them in line. We get out of Iraq the same way we got out of Vietnam: when every one says "Enough!" Not politicians. People. We are not there yet. . Want us out? Don't harrasss politicians who are in the bind of trying to hurdle across the Red Stae / Blue State Bullshit divide by negotiating their way into office until they can then finally do soemthing. Politics is not a consumer concept and politicians are not brands. They don't get delivered to you nice and shiny and reflecting YOUR values. They come to the fore by doing as much and saying as much as they can to reflect the values of the most people.

It's about compromise and horse trading. You may not get the environment you want or the Iraq departue date you want but you'll make progress and you'll be moving in the right direction. If that makes you angrey and impatient and you can't or won't wait ... well maybe demcoracy is not for you. After all, it is a system that reflects the views of even the average Americans that so many of you hold in such contempt in these pages.

So if this long difficult slog through bullshit and compromise that makes you fight against powerful and formidable (and well financed) forces isn't your cup of tea, then maybe you are not cut out for this. Don't worry, there are many forms of government that make it all very easy, that let the elite run the show and don't have to put up with "average" people or "average" politicians. Most are over there ... on the Right.

But I think you know that. "Common Dreams"? Very common indeed.

"This is the same media that called opposition to the Iraq occupation a radical leftist position also, making nearly 70 percent of the country so-called radical leftists."

Thinking like this is what Dean is talking about. Because over 75% of the American people oppose the occupation in Iraq, that doesn't mean for a minute they support leftist or Progressive ideas and policies.

The movement of the center, the vast majority of voters that control our elections, moved left of center in 06.....they can just as easily move again if they are scared.

I'd point out the just defeated illegal immigration bill. It was also supported by the leadership of the Democratic party and most of the Progressive community. It was defeated by that same majority you believe moved left.

Using illegal immigration as an example, if it advocated by Progressives and Democrats do you really believe that same majority will vote for leftist policies or Progressive policies and candidates?

06 was a rejection of the neocons, far right extremists as much as it was a move left of center. Who was right, Kos or Ford? we'll soon see.....but I believe Ford and Dean are closer to the mark.

I've heard the "get involved at the grassroots level and change the Democratic Party" line for a decade now. Maybe someone should step back and ask if its working.

To me its just a way the Democratic Party serves to co-opt and deflect energy for change. The energy for change gets diverted off in to some Don Quixotie-est primary campaign (see Kucinich for an example) that simply CAN NOT WIN in the rigged, undemocratic game that is the Democratic party. Then the next thing you know the people who go down that path are telling you to vote for John Kerry because he's the lesser of the evils. And you find yourself with no viable choice in the general election because instead of building a grassroots party that can compete you've wasted your energy on a primary inside the Democratic party that you knew you were going to lose in the first place.

And the fundamental point is, I DON'T GIVE A DAMN IF A REPUBLICAN GETS ELECTED INSTEAD OF A DEMOCRAT. The differences are so tiny as to be minute. Just listen to Hillary and Obama acting about who can be more warlike about who would attack Pakistan if elected. Or read the recent Frida Berrigan piece about how none of the Democrats who might get the nomination are even thinking about cutting the Defense budget.

With Tom Delay and Hastert running Congress every year, the Iraq war was fully funded every year. With Nancy Pelosi running the house, the Iraq war is fully funded. What's the difference? With Delay and Hastert running the House, they passed bills giving Bush more spying authority. With Nancy Pelosi running the House, they passed bills giving Bush more spying authority. What's the difference?

Quit telling about some cool city councilman who's a Democrat and does good stuff locally. BFD! The party is rigged such that a person like that won't advance very for. Or, they'll do an Obey or a Pelosi and they'll use the fact that maybe once they were decent to try to hide the fact that to rise in the party they had to abandon that and become yet another pro-war, pro-corporate crony.

Face it, the change the Democratic party approach from the grassroots has been tried for at least a decade. It ain't working. It ain't going to work. The powers that control the Democratic Party have made sure from the rules and structure of hte party that it ain't never going to work. Give it up. Its time for another approach. Its time to abandon the rotting, smelling hulk of foulness that is the top of today's Democratic party and to build something new.

If you don't, you'll just keep getting the same results you keep getting. You'll just keep getting pro-war, pro-corporate so-called Democratic candidates and you'll just keep getting told you don't have any alternative to vote for them. And you won't have any alternative than to vote for them unless you get out and build that alternative yourselves.