Tweet
Daily Kos sent an email on December 6 promoting a strategy to eliminate the “Bush” tax cuts on the wealthy:
This will really make John Boehner cry
David, please send an email to your member of the House of Representatives, telling him or her to sign the discharge petition that would force an up or down vote on ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2%. Click here to send an email.
House Republican leaders are refusing to hold a vote on ending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2%. However, there is a way we can get around them and force a vote to take place.
If 218 members of the House of Representatives sign what is known as a “discharge petition,” then the House will have to hold a vote, no matter what Republican leaders think.
House Democrats filed a discharge petition on Tuesday, and already 178 members have signed it. We only need 40 more.
Keep fighting,
Chris Bowers
Campaign Director, Daily Kos
Naturally, I’m more interested in slowing the rise of plutocracy than in making Boehner cry, but this seemed like a decent enough initiative, even a small-d democractic one. There was no mention of military spending here, of course. But it was OK as far as it went.
Then came a proposal from President Obama to continue the “Bush” tax cuts for a large section of the super-wealthy, and to cut Social Security. Daily Kos continued to ignore Pentagon spending, dropped the subject of the tax cuts, and focused on Social Security. This was on December 18:
Take immediate action to protect Social Security:
In his most recent attempt to strike a deal with Republicans, President Obama has proposed new cuts to Social Security by switching to the chained consumer price index, which would reduce benefits for current and future recipients of the program, with benefits shrinking further over time.
This proposed benefit cut goes against previous statements from the White House which indicated that Social Security cuts would not be part of negotiations because Social Security is not the cause of or solution to our budget woes. On November 26, 2012, White House spokesperson Jay Carney stated, “Social Security is not currently a driver of the deficit. That’s an economic fact.”
Cutting Social Security benefits for millions of vulnerable Americans is not an acceptable compromise and does not address economic problems.
Please, send an email to President Obama asking him to drop his proposed cuts to Social Security.
Keep fighting,
Joan McCarter, Daily Kos
Remarkably, this email actually proposed pushing back against the outrageous policies of President Obama. How long could that last?
Not long. By December 20, with Obama tossing Social Security and probably Medicare overboard, and with Pelosi and other Democrats going along, Daily Kos suddenly decided that the place to take a stand was actually on Medicaid. Again, Daily Kos ignores war preparations spending. It drops all mention of taxing billionaires or millionaires. And now Social Security is gone. We’re down to drawing a line on the sand to protect the one program the Democrats are not attacking:
Non-negotiable
David, please ask Congress to leave Medicaid cuts out of any and all negotiations over the budget.
Right now, leaders from both parties are in Washington, DC trying to make a deal on taxes and spending before we hit the so-called fiscal cliff.
Cuts to Medicaid should not be part of the deal. Period.
Something has to give. We have to find more money somewhere, but we shouldn’t find it in the pockets of the middle class, elderly, or working families who can’t afford it.
Keep Fighting
Michael Miller, Daily Kos
What could explain this gradual shift toward demanding whatever doesn’t much need to be demanded?
Here’s one possible explanation, from Daily Kos’s description of itself:
“This is a Democratic blog, a partisan blog. One that recognizes that Democrats run from left to right on the ideological spectrum, and yet we’re all still in this fight together. We happily embrace centrists like NDN’s Simon Rosenberg and Howard Dean, conservatives like Martin Frost and Brad Carson, and liberals like John Kerry and Barack Obama. Liberal? Yeah, we’re around here and we’re proud. But it’s not a liberal blog. It’s a Democratic blog with one goal in mind: electoral victory. And since we haven’t gotten any of that from the current crew, we’re one more thing: a reform blog. The battle for the party is not an ideological battle. It’s one between establishment and anti-establishment factions. And as I’ve said a million times, the status quo is untenable.”
I can just about agree with that last bit.
20 Comments
IOW whatever Pete Peterson and the other owners of the Dims decide. Can you say “windsock”? I knew that you could.
With the presidential election over, Markos Moulitsas will permit a moderate amount of dissent on his blog–and make no mistake, it’s his. However, once we get into the run-up for the 2014 elections, Daily Kos will once again become a communications and fund-raising arm for the Democratic Party establishment.
But the lesser-evilist scary election rationale persuades a lot of people. In between elections, the lesser evilism carries on without any justification whatsoever. It’s not as if Romney gets to be president if Obama ends a war or refrains from stealing our grandparents’ money.
DailyKos is MSNBC on the net….I have long since stopped watching
MSNBC & haven’t visited DailyKos in over a year.
Just as corrupt as the DNC….
Thanks David.
Recommended (FDL)
Tweeted
Recommended (FB)
My personal feeling is that we ought to unite and draft an aggressive manifesto that leaves no doubt as to our position. We have to say in no uncertain terms that we oppose cuts to Social Security and Medicare benefits, that we oppose bloated war funding, indiscriminate drone attacks and an extended U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, that the president’s position on assassination minus due process is flatly unacceptable, and that we will not call people like Elizabeth Warren “bold progressives”. I want the general public to know that big-tent schmucks like the Daily Kos do not speak for me.
David- DLC Dems are part of the Democratic Coalition. Are they to big a part of the coalition, most assuredly. On policy matters the DLC is the tail wagging the dog. However, the ” official messaging ” part of the Democratic Party is filtered through the MSM, with the help of the DNC, and they often pick the voices which are heard by a majority of Americans. ( These Americans are self identified on a scale of far left to far right, including independents or non-affiliated. ) Pick different DNC members and you’ll get a different, more progressive message. Will it be the message people reading this want, possibly. But to align someone such as Howard Dean to the right of John Kerry shows someone doesn’t know what they’re talking about. Did Howard speak at the 2012 Democratic Convention? He ran the 2008 one, correct? ( I was there and I know who supported who in the early primaries. I know the playas, too. Enough said. ) Coalitions are where we’re at in America today. I would love to see more of you on the TEEVEE. Also, more of Naomi Klein, Noam Chomsky, etc. You draw well where I call home. The head messenger is an important part of this. That’s how this could be done to get where most grass roots Dems are. Just sayin. BTW- Did you ever meet Marshall McCluhan?
we do that at http://rootsaction.org
never
but today i did RT-Russia, Radio Islam, and Global Peace TV
And, pray tell, what kind of medium was that messenger (you ) on? Cable or wireless? And, good for you. Happy holidays.
I write back to DK, DNC, DCCC, DSCC and Obama as often as possible.
I write Free Bradley Manning!
I always get a nice thank you, generated by a computer, never a query or an agreement to my sentiment.
IT’s EVERY WORKING PERSON WHO WILL BE AFFECTED BY THESE CUTS
Sure, people currently on Social Security or about to go on Social Security will see an immediate impact that will enlarge over time.
But people with 10, 20, 30, or 40 years before they can collect will see a much larger impact. For example, say the impact is 3.3% (remember compounding) in 10 years. In 20 years, it will be 6.7%. In 30 years, 10%. In 40 years, 14% …
So if you are currently 25 years old, when you hit 65, you will be getting 14% less without paying in a penny less. Then, at 75, you will be getting about 18% less .. At 85, about 23% less.
Since Social Security is not part of the deficit, and the “shortfall” 23 years out will only materialize if a bunch of very conservative assumptions come to fruition, this is just a flat out rip-off.
Raise hell! Let your representatives know that their actions will not only not be forgotten, they will be remembered constantly and loudly every time they appear to the American public.
I know, and I’m a big fan of Roots Action :) I was thinking more along the lines of taking out a full-page ad in the New York Times on Superbowl Sunday that begins, “You know, just for the record…” A futile gesture? Probably, but I would love to see the true Left clarify where it stands in contrast to these dreary, centrist-y pragmaticalist pretenders.
Too bad the Progressive Caucus is too beholden to what they used to call “party bosses” to do that, huh?
Oh, I wouldn’t rely on those folks for anything. I meant those of us outside the Beltway–the ones who are actually living the nightmare. Any career politician is of course a lost cause.
Obama has completely destroyed any and all the activism in the Democratic party that was left. How can a professional politician be an activist with a president like Borack Obama. The president, by talking left, and moving right, has put all progressive minded politicians in a very awkward position.
While people here at FDL, can’t hear what he’s saying for seeing what he’s doing, the masses only hear what he’s saying, and it sounds like it’s good for them. I heard a lady who’s having some really hard economic times, call in to CNN, and say Barack Obama was doing all he can for people like her, but the Republicans were standing in his way.
Barack Obama put up no insuperable barrier to American citizens organizing and recruiting into a voting resistance movement, or two. Of course, he serves the 1%, and the media helps confuse the public’s mind about what he’s really about.
However, that’s about as relevant to the powerlessness of the public, vis-a-vis the plutocrats, as the fact that dogs bark, and cats meow. What, pray tell, should we expect of dogs, cats, and career politicians like Barack Obama?
Who amongst us measures the measuring stick and defines the progress in the word progressive? Less than 40% of Obama’s votes came from self-identified white people of either gender in the 2012 elections. In the urban areas of America that 40% vote would be considered thoughtful and progressive by a majority, I’d think. In the ‘burbs, the ex-urbs, the ranchettes and rural areas of this country, however, it can draw forth a much different, regressive response. Regressive to my measuring stick, anyway. I would be interested in seeing David use his measuring stick to tell us where he sees this country. Possibly using the Port Huron Statement from 5 decades ago. I’d hope he thinks this time is enough for good historical perspective.
If only it was that simple? I don’t know anyone personally who is as aware of the facts as we are. How do you propose to educate all the people who are unaware of the facts. How do you propose to erect a new force for progressives. If it can’t be done within the Democratic party, it’s going to be very hard, and most progressives have written off the Democratic Party. Once a person faces “reality” head on, they know what they’re up against.
You can google my numerous diaries. Also, google “Nancy Bordier” on a systematized, technological way to form flexible voting blocs.
I don’t argue that defeating plutocracy is easy, only that it is possible, and focusing on servants of the 1% unduly takes away from the public’s realization of who is most at fault, collectively, for this mess.
And it ain’t Barack Obama, that’s for sure.
Also, by “defeating plutocracy”, I don’t mean eliminating all wealth, or eliminating capitalism. I personally have no interest in going that far.