Boy, for a website that I felt valued diversity and tolerance, apparently that doesn’t extend to musical tastes!

I wasn’t the world’s #1 disco fan, but some of the music was catchy and fun to dance to. There are plenty of music genres I don’t particularly like (country, free jazz, rap) but I’m not bitter that they exist! And I actually think the BeeGees were talented; if nothing else, they certainly were talented businessmen.

Years ago I took a music appreciation class at Stanford. I remember the teacher saying that you have to learn to appreciate the difficulty, complexity and originality of a composition. Essentially, whether a song is pleasing to the ear was seen as almost irrelevant. Well, that’s a nice theory, but it’s not reality. If you don’t like listening to it, it doesn’t matter how complex and creative it is-you’re going to turn it off. Apparently a lot of people liked listening to disco…until they didn’t anymore.

Oh, no worries for NOM or anyone else who agrees with them. They will do what others have done in recent years regarding the NAACP – disregard them as irrelevant. If you think I’m wrong, listen to Rush Limbaugh or Fox Newsy folks over the next week…they will employ the divide and conquer strategy, meaning the NAACP does not represent the views of most blacks, just like they now say AARP doesn’t represent the views of most seniors, NOW doesn’t represent the views of most women, etc. etc.

The reason the tea party and far right are more successful than the far left is because

1) the far right is pretty much in sync with corporate interests, so their partners are already power wielders. The left has George Soros and George Clooney. The far right has oil and gas, banks, megachurches, defense contractors, etc. etc.

2) the other reason is something I think people on this site don’t want to accept – more Americans agree with the far right than with the far left. Thirty years of a superb messaging campaign has successfully painted liberals as freeloading, entitled, lazy, valueless individuals.

What’s interesting is that with healthcare, supposedly (if polls are to be believed) people do really like elements of the healthcare law. The fact that the far right is unbothered by that shows how supremely confident that this won’t hurt them and people will support them even as they’re being denied insurance for a pre-existing condition.

I would be very careful about your wish. Those who wait for things to hit rock bottom risk an existence like Syria right now, where people are motivated and inspired but the power structure is too entrenched and will just wear down (or mow down) the opposition. It’s very hard to fight back when there are no further avenues to help balance the scales. For example, people look for help from the courts, but if the courts get packed with more GOP appointees, that option falls to the wayside as well.

Walker is probably going to win, but it’s very important to try to make it close. As Karl Rove said, the wider the margin, the more they can tout the message that this is what the “overwhelming” number of the American people want. Instead I think people need to move on to other battles and try to stem the momentum.

Trading “Walker’s assault on public workers for a warm mush of themes” may be due to the fact that I heard polls cited even several months ago in which collective bargaining was not all that popular in the state. Then Ed Schultz tonight said that 39% of union household support Walker, showing that his divide and conquer strategy has clearly been quite successful. Of course, he’ll eventually come after the public safety and private unions too someday, but right now he’s got their backs.

With only 20 days to go, it will take a miracle for Barrett to prevail, but I think if the recall supporters can somehow regenerate some of that energy from a year ago, they can at least make it close. And when you’re outspent 20:1 by the billionaire boys club, that would still be saying something.

You people are unbelievable. Wake up and look around. North Carolina just trounced gay marriage. Colorado’s bid to just legalize civil unions – not gay marriage – just failed. The Governor may try to drag reps back into session, but he can’t force them to vote on it. One of the NY state senators who supported gay marriage just aborted his re-election campaign in part because he like others was targeted for his SSM vote. Please do make sure to thank him for his courage, and do know that every politician seeing what happened to him is never going to be as courageous again.

I don’t happen to think that gay marriage will be a main factor in the majority of people’s votes, but if it is a main factor in enough votes in swing states that Romney wins, enjoy the next 4 or 8 years of no movement or backwards movement in this issue. Even if Romney is just pandering to his base, there is no way he won’t keep pandering while he’s in office if he’s reminded by the base that he owes his victory in part to keeping the gays in their place.

If you don’t think Obama was courageous in his stance, then you should enjoy the lack of courage in Republicans and Democrats alike that will ensue.

I know most FDL posters see no difference between the parties and resent the lack of options. But reality is what it is. And with stats saying that in 94% of the cases the best funded candidate wins, it is a commentary on the electorate more than the political parties.

The reason Dennis Kucinich is out is because a Republican governor and majorities in Ohio’s House and Senate were able to get into office and redistrict him away. Had that not happened, both he and Kaptor wouldn’t have been competing. It’s happening all over. You may not like the Democrats, but I suspect in most cases that if Democrats had been in power the last two years at the state level, you wouldn’t see the same amount of new voting rules, vaginal probe laws, drug testing for unemployment bills, etc. as you are now. But if you really think there’s no difference, keep letting the the GOP take over.

And for those who apparently advocate for more of the SDS violent approach, I question the logic. I’ve heard people criticize glitter bombing much less more serious destruction. Most have an aversion to that type of tactic, so those who perpetrate it just get labeled as extremists. It won’t bring about change. Just public condemnation and jail.

But such anti-SSM initiatives have passed in 31 states, so it’s hard to believe it’s unconstitutional because otherwise we’d have had successful challenges by now.

I think the only reason the Prop 8 case was able to be challenged was because not only did the law legalize same sex marriage, but people actually got married during the 18 months preceding Prop 8′s passage. In Maine, for example, the legislature legalized same sex marriage, but no marriages were allowed to take place while they collected iniative signatures to repeal the law. So it appears the argument that a right already granted was taken away wouldn’t have worked because up until the point the initiative passed, no gay or lesbian couple could legally get married.

This is why SSM opponents in Washington will insist on a stay until they try to qualify it for the ballot and vote on it. That way if it goes down to defeat by popular vote, there could be no court challenge similar to the Prop 8 challenge.

Correct. The one thing on which NOM is accurate is that, for now, when SSM is put to a popular vote, it will lose. Maybe not by as much as it did 20 or even 10 years ago, but it will still lose. They have the means to make people feel that their children are in danger and life as we know it will cease to exist if SSM is allowed to go forward (current examples to the contrary notwithstanding.

I understand the argument that these things shouldn’t be put to popular vote, but as long as we have an initiative process, they will be. The only way to really quiet NOM and other SSM opponents is to have one of these ballot initiatives come out in favor of SSM. When that happens (which it will…it’s just a matter of when) it will be interesting to hear the spin since they’ll have to defend their mantra of “let the people decide” when the people didn’t decide as they’d hoped.

Well if you don’t want it to be “not now, I’m running for re-election,” then compete at the same level as the oil and gas companies whose message and surrogates dominate the airways. How about big ad buys countering the “130,000 jobs” argument? How about plain speaking surrogates blanketing the mainstream media reinforcing the fact that we don’t get to keep the oil/gas so it’s not going to help with energy security. If you ask the man on the street, most would say Obama’s decision is a job killer. I certainly know that’s all I heard on the radio news yesterday.

I know your preference is for Obama to say we’re never going to build it, not now not ever. And then when he loses re-election, reversing that decision will probably be a “Day 1″ executive action of the new President. I’d rather take my chances on this issue with a second-term, no re-election Obama than a President Romney or Gingrich.

So you didn’t want him to block it now?

It may be an outlier but it’s interesting that all day yesterday every hourly newscast I heard yesterday cited that particular poll result. It could be because it’s the most recent, but it sort of struck me that they were reinforcing the meme of Romney inevitability. Certainly there wasn’t even a passing mention that other polls showed the margin to be smaller.

It sort of reaffirmed my belief that polls are more a tool to persuade voters than a reflection of their preferences.

This is actually the “we’re not haters” NOM strategy. Same sex marriage is already illegal in North Carolina, so they already know they have majority support for keeping it that way. But amending the constitution to address the issue hasn’t been as popular, especially since it goes further than just the SSM marriage issue. So by regularly reminding everyone they have no interest in ostracizing gays or preventing them from living together, it makes those who weren’t inclined to vote for the amendment either because they’re fearful of government overreach or they have gay family members, neighbors, co-workers, etc. feel better about supporting it.

Completely agree with you. Many here criticize the Nelsons, Webbs, Testers, etc. but there would be no Democratic Senators from those states if Democrats tried to run Bernie Sanders-types. As Lawrence O’Donnell said last night, Nelson voted with the Democrats 82% of the time; his Nebraskan Republican counterpart voted with Democrats 8% of the time. And considering McCain won that state by 15% in 2008, it’s amazing Nelson was elected at all. I think it’s pretty clear most people in Nebraska don’t view the world like FDL posters. They think like Fox News hosts.

But since many think there’s no difference between the two parties, they’ll get their chance to prove that when Republicans are back in charge of the Presidency, House & Senate. According to this theory, every decision, every piece of legislation, every judicial pick will be exactly the same as if Democrats were in the majority.

Okay, as long as you acknowledge that the “greater good” is in the mind of the property destroyer. Surely pro-lifers think that’s what they’re promoting when they destroy an abortion clinic. Whoever cut the gas line of former Democratic Congressman Tom Perriello’s brother (thinking it was the Congressman’s address) likely thought they were acting on behalf of the greater good because they were trying to stop the government takeover of healthcare (and yes, I know, most FDL posters only wish that were the case).

Property may not be the same as people, but as John Sherman said above, vandalism ultimately just alienates supporters and would-be supporters. Whether, as realitychecker said, it should be considered morally acceptable is a separate argument from its utility in achieving the desired end. It’s too easy to dismiss vandals as hooligans; then the more important message is lost.

If he’s furthering the Republican agenda, then I assume he’ll win re-election handily with all that GOP support he’ll get. But he needs to get better at letting them know he’s furthering their agenda. Some of them still think he’s a radical leftist, anti-business, dictator-appeasing, big government liberal.

And how exactly do you set that agenda? For the last year, I must have seen 25 polls about how “Americans” (in this most generic sense) favor raising taxes on the upper 1%. Yet, in vote after vote on this issue in various forms the measures have always failed. Why? Don’t these legislators fear losing electoral support based on those polls?

No, because congressional leaders know these votes don’t hurt them in their individual districts. Most constituents only care if their own taxes go up (hence the outcome of the payroll tax issue), not the taxes on the upper 1%. It’s only when the loss of government services impacts a person directly that they care about revenue generation. But for most, they don’t feel that direct impact.

Those “irrelevant” politicians make the laws that impact your life, and when they also appoint or approve the judges that determine if those laws are fair or just, then you may not get help from the courts either. So that leaves the argument I’ve seen on FDL for revolution. Isn’t that what Occupy is supposed to be? A revolution of the 99%? But the people who most vociferously damn and dismiss the occupy events and the occupiers themselves are, per this article, leading the electoral polls. That doesn’t bode well for a successful revolution.

And I wouldn’t count on Democrats “rising up” should Republicans take over all 3 branches. What have Democrats in the House been able to do the last 2 years? They couldn’t get anything they wanted passed and couldn’t stop anything they didn’t want from passing. When the Senate goes Republican too, that firewall will be gone, and then throw in a Republican president? But I guess if you’re prepared to accept whatever comes, okay. I’ll check back during year 1 of the Republican trifecta and see if everyone still believes it couldn’t get worse.