The key to keep in mind is that left versus right is not an ideological juxtaposition, it is a reflection of personality types. Hence, there is no chance of “the left” becoming as craven as the “the right” has been for more than generation. People trending to wingnut cravenness will become wingnuts, not craven lefties. Ascendance of “the left” to the presidency with current control of the legislature (if it happens) will present its own set of problems and result in the splintering of the left. But the rank hypocrisy, deceit, character assassination, military adventurism, and destruction of the constitution and rule of law that have characterized the apex of the cult of republicanism rule are not among the possible outcomes of “left” dominance due to the “personality” type of the left.

OT- Have you seen the pictures of LAPD shooting rubber bullets at the protesters and threatening them with their batons? I’m already ready to explode. Looks like a police state. Looks like the 60s. Wasn’t there some weapon that BushCo wanted to try out on Americans? What was that? And where is Arnold?
VERY SCARY PICS

1) Milatary weapon is a laser item that will begin to heat your skin and make you MOVE fast.

2) Arnold has contracted with Blackwater and they are building a HUGE training facility in San Diego. When civil unrest develops, Blackwater Mercs will take to the streets without questin and CLEAR them. Blackwater has been contracted to provide CA based security services, cuz the GUARD is in Iraq (wink wink).

Arnold is second in line to fear when martial law is declared by the ChimpEnMeister. They are BOTH dictators in waiting.

You need to be afraid, if you live in CA, or this nation. Very afraid.

There are plenty of corporatist Democrats for the progressive blogosphere to target, even if we elect a Democratic President in 2008. Hoyer, et al., will require constant monitoring regardless of who sits in the Oval Office. I don’t expect to let up on Truth-Squadding our party on Capitol Hill — it might be even more important if Democrats control both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue with a cloture-majority in the Senate.

We aren’t going away and we aren’t going to give any Democrat in the White House a free pass. If the victor expects that from the progressive blogosphere, he or she is sorely mistaken.

Transformational change takes more than winning the White House. It takes constant, unrelenting pressure. Ask Pachacutec if you don’t believe me!

TROOPS
HOME
NOW

Happy May Day from a former San Matean, now stuck in thegodforsakenvalleythattimeforgot. Sacto.

I’m down with yer up on the issue.

And tell me this, how many of my party running for the nomination for president support a fair and just settlement to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Apart from Kucinich.

And THIS, is why, I have little hope for the dem’s, and fear them as much as the rest of corporatist america and the MIC.

That said, I wonder why the Democrats can’t force the Repubs to defend against censure while we the people push for impeachment. Is this an insane idea? Or worse a coward’s way out?

Basically I want something in the Congressional records that shows this Prez was considered a failure. If for no other reason than when he is out of office and on the BS tour saying how misunderstood his vision was, there will be something that shows that congress really did have his number.

“Follow the money” has always been more aphorism than axiom, even among investigative reporters. But given the very readily available data in this case, Chait’s failure to observe it is more than kind of like refusing to acknowledge the doubly figurative elephant in the room.

From Fox News to WND to Swift Boaters, one side of Chait’s equation is overwhelmingly funded by a comparatively small group of super-wealthy corporate titans. The other, from Daily Kos to Tbogg is primarily sustained by a patchwork that includes some superwealthy corporate titans (though comparatively fewer in number, providing comparatively smaller sums, some self-financing, and — in one form or another — people power, either directly, or in advertising revenue that rises and falls on a free-market rather than a Scaife-
or-Murdoch-assisted basis. They are, a priori, definitely not equal when assessed by a universally accepted standard measurement, and unless the inequity is noted and accommodated, not even meaningfully comparable.

If the general subject is how to evaluate the quality and implications of external influence on a political party’s platform, a difference that major with respect to flow of funds is literally the difference between up and down. In one case, following the money is a trip that is more likely to start at the top of a few very high and exclusive peaks, and in the other, it is more likely to be a strenuous hike up multiple, open-to-everyone mountain trails.

Subtract that factor, and all you’ve got is rhetoric (or propaganda). Or, since I get to choose the loaded language here, what I would call rote, unsupported, and intellectually hollow cant.

Also: To what “moderate majority” is Chait referring exactly? I’m willing to believe that there is one, but it would be nice to see the evidence.

lolo @ 90

ccmask @ 35

Well, Oprah on Larry King, just nominated Obama. She said she has nothing against Hillary and likes her very much, but she is for Obama. How big is Oprah’s following???

huge!

That is an amazing endorsement, well gang, let’s hop on the Obama Express..

oprah has endorsed obama since long before he declared himself a candidate. she provided him the platform of her show at least twice since last fall, mostly with the intention of speaking to a presidential candidacy for him.

that, as well as other MSM darling activities has me most suspicious of obama. i’m willing to learn of him as something more than an empty suit, but i haven’t seen that substance yet. only him speaking about the substance he will have…

right now, other candidates will have to demonstrate to me why i should not vote for John Edwards. he strikes me as the candidate who has the most substance at this point in the process.

The Capitol Hill Blue webpage quoted before has some rather amazing quotes.

It’s OT for now, but the one by Justice Scalia amazes me and I think I heard him say it once on a PBS show. How can he say the Court can take away rights? He says he’s only reading the text of the Constitution, but I don’t know where that is in the document.

I demand my right to run real fast with scissors in my hands!

Maybe we can get back to discussing this at some more appropriate time.

Eli @ 197

Rayne @ 189

Yeah. Chalk one up for the netroots; we got rid of the consultantocracy’s grip on the Democratic National Committee chair. I think we too often forget that was the first HUGE netroots win — within our own party.

Now we just need to get rid of it from the DSCC/DCCC…

Rahm is no longer the DCCC chair, there’s a netroots candidate instead in Chris Van Hollen. Believe that we need to keep the pressure on DSCC for this next election cycle; keep in mind that the really big prize we absolutely MUST WIN is the veto-proof majority in the Senate, so that no matter who becomes president, we retain the ability to shut down any attempts to continue in the direction we have been headed. DSCC understands this, but they need to play ball or we are going to give directly to the candidates and cut out the f*cking middle men.

As much as I’d like to see BushCo impeached and forgotten about in the Hague and after reading all the debates in the last few weeks I believe it all boils down to the goal of a progressive veto-proof majority.
That is why I read FDL and that is why I stay optimistic in the face all the wrongs done by the current administration.