Comments on: No.

By: TX Unmuzzled

TX Unmuzzled — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 03:11:55 +0000

This isn’t entirely fair. Rahm has a good point. These are turnover districts. If we hold them in ‘08, then fine we can start proceeding in a more progressive manner. But right now voters want 1) competence, and 2) solutions. It’s clean-up time, and we have to prove… PROVE… that we are no longer tax and spend out-of-touch liberals. Compromise IS INDEED in order. We have to show we can competently govern, and that is in OUR BEST LONG TERM INTEREST. And if that means compromise now to shift the playing field to a more progressive position in 2008 and beyond, then great.

The GREATEST LOSS for us is an electorate that says “they are no better, no less stubborn, no less ideological, no less out-of-touch than the other party.” We really should tread carefully.

And remember, Bush has had more than enough rope to hang himself and his entire administration. Simple hearings airing the facts will lead us to justice. We MUST have the electorate behind us.

As Bush himself proved - just SAYING you have a mandate does NOT make it so.

By: Remember, Remember, the Seventh of November « Republic of Vuscaria

Remember, Remember, the Seventh of November « Republic of Vuscaria — Thu, 09 Nov 2006 01:32:17 +0000

[…] This hasn’t stopped the Corporate-owned GOP-friendly media from spinning the sea change in our politics as some sort of victory for conservatism however. Sheesh the chatterati really are a broken record. And the DINO branch of the Democratic Party is already spinning Progressive victories as really Centrist victories. Umm no. Thanks Christy and Pachacutec, for going into detail about this here and here. While there were numerous reports of election irregularities, many of them caused by those hackable electronic voting machines, it does not appear to have altered the outcome of the elections…the wave was simply too big. There were however incidents of Republican-sponsored voter suppression and fraud. These are being vigorously prosecuted. […]

By: Disputo

Disputo — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 21:24:02 +0000

You’re late to this party. Last week Rahm was setting up an armada of trial balloons about him being Speaker. This is just more of the same. At least now he has waited until after the election to twist the knife in Pelosi’s back.

Rahm is all about his own personal power, and unfortunately he has dragged the formerly progressive Schakowsky into it with him. If Rahm looses this round (which I fully expect), look for him to position Schakowsky as a “more reasonable progressive” stalking horse in the near future to take on Pelosi.

By: Kevin Hayden

Kevin Hayden — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:58:03 +0000

Anyone favoring backing off better go back 46 years and re-read Eisenhower’s farewell speech.

Rahm’s not positioning himself as moderate publicly while planning to be a lion of progressivity. He’s just eager to step up to the trough. And don’t put your hand in the way unless you want it bitten off.

We won one battle yesterday. But the ‘culture of corporation’ lives on to fight another day.

Give me more Dr. Dean. He writes better prescriptions.

By: No. | Election Reporter

No. | Election Reporter — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:52:08 +0000

[…] November 8, 2006No. I ask you, considering the margins that we are looking at this morning in a whole lot of the races that the Democrats won yesterday, in both the House and the Senate, what was Rahm Emmanuel thinking saying this: […]

By: Allyaneedtoknow

Allyaneedtoknow — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:51:15 +0000

And another thing if I can, many of those blue collar folks who feel the brunt of illegals forcing their wages
down, would understand if the house
voted for impeachment. Because payback
is something that they get. So, John
Conyers, please get that ball rolling
ASAP & God bless.

By: The American Street » Blog Archive » Time to Get the Hard Drive Going

The American Street » Blog Archive » Time to Get the Hard Drive Going — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:49:32 +0000

[…] You can’t get on them internet tubes when all you’ve got is a defective Seedy Rahm. […]

By: jukesgrrl

jukesgrrl — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:46:11 +0000

Speaker Pelosi better consolidate her power and put down Rahm and Chuck before they turn on her … because they will. They might be Democrats, but they are taking all their strategies out of the Republican play book. They are reveling in their “success” and giving NO credit to Dean or the netroots. For instance, absolutely no one is talking about the stunning defeat of Santorum acolyte Melissa Hart in Western Pennsylvania. She won all her other elections handily and outspent new Rep. Jason Altmire three to one this time. Rahm never gave Altmire a dime (I don’t even think he knew who he was) until two weeks ago. A lot of important elections were won nationwide with NO SUPPORT from Rahm and Chuck. The only thing they have control of is the spin on the airwaves. The progressives need to caucus to consolidate their power and their message to cut old-think off at the knees. It’s a lot about the money, but it’s NOT ALL about the money, Rahm.

By: Kevin J-M

Kevin J-M — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 19:29:43 +0000

Rahm Emanuel (and his so-called brass balls) MUST go. Can Dean (whose strategy was the obvious success of this campaign) shut him up or at least marginalize him?

By: KevinNYC

KevinNYC — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 18:46:33 +0000

Um, are we sure Rahm made this quote to the Post? It doesn’t say he told the Post this in an interview. In fact, the sourcing means it could be someone other than Emanuel who spoke to the post. Did you miss this part?

In private talks before the election, Emanuel and other top Democrats told their members