Actually it's quite likely that the Republicans will challenge some of these "blue dogs". The fact that they vote Republican on so many issues implies that their districts lean Republican, and the GOP is going to need every seat they can get to retain the House. They'll do polls and try to unseat anyone who looks weak.

America has the best government money can buy.

Joe Buck and Mike are both 100% correct.

The Democratic 'party' has become an object of pity, but is fast becoming a party not worthy of support.

Why do those Dems vote this way? Setting aside the possibility that they think this moral, good policy, reflects the views of their constituents, or in the country's best interests (which I really don't believe are the motivators of this behavior), one is left with some not-so-wholesome explanations:

- their votes were pressured by or encouraged by lobbyists that promised revenge or support

- they were paid off

- they believed that Delay and Rove wouldn't come after them next election if they played nice

- they feared past large-amount contributions they will need in the future would not materialize unless they went along

- they see no future in the Democratic party or,

- feel no fear from liberal voters and contributors and possible primary competitors.

The only one of these factors that the liberal left can affect is the last: we must organize against them in the next primary and put real money in the hands of liberal opponents of whatever party

It is so unfortunate that we Democrats have no party discipline, no party "creed", no party principles. It looks like every man for himself now. Pelosi and Reed need to get out a big whip and use it to instill some discipline.

i think they vote like that because they're whores, hence no different from republicans.

Insider politics don't you just love it?.....yeah right.

thanks for this. I have forwarded it on to my parents, who are democratic committee members in Egg Harbor NJ.
They are furious with their reps, especially Robert Andrews, to the point of blowing their stacks.

I'm not uncomfortable with the fact that you harp on cheesy dems just as much as repubs. In fact, I thank you for it.

You call these people Republicans. But we can't call them that: we need a term to identify Democrats who have no social conscience. The obvious choice is Democrats in Name Only, as DINO evokes the lumbering extinction that these folks bring us closer to. But I have a better term I think, and a little more serious: Republicans in Sheep's Klothing. Because RISKs to our social welfare is what these people are. And frankly I think they are RISKs we can do without.

PLEASE note the states of these reps.

I want to commend all the razor-sharp people here who have clearly seen through the Democratic Party's smoke and mirrors. The average person might have trouble equating a handful of Dems with the entire party, but not this blog. This blog can see the truth, and the truth is that the only good Dem is a dead Dem. Like Paul Wellstone. Or Huberty Humphrey. What great Dems. We need more like them.

You want to know another really sad thing, these sellout democrats allow republicons to get a free pass on this. Yes I am outraged at these democrats because they should know better. But I am also outraged at the lockstep republicons whose party platform and agenda embraces and pushes the best government money can buy. It's called the ownershit society, and if you have more money you buy more shit, including access, power, votes and a piece of favorable legislation that will benefit you and your wealthy friends.

I am sick and tired of the bullshit republicon (destroying the middle class) agenda and their democratic enablers for allowing republicons a free pass to enact it. By their support these sellout democratic enablers also provide a wonderful cover for them.... Idiots. Didn't they learn anything from the IWR vote? Don't they know that bipartisanship is Grover Norquist's word for date rape...except this time it's the average American that is getting screwed.

Shiiittt...

I virtually guarantee Rahm told Melissa Bean to vote in favor of both.

at the end of the day, these people are politicians. Why do we ever trust them anyway.....well, at least the Dems haven't learned how to rig elections yet. Think of the mess we'll have if they do.

1) How does the ABA get tarred for this? Officially, they took no position on the bill and they certainly didn't lobby in favor.

2) Bean is a bitter disappointment only 5 months in. First the inexplicable Schavio vote, now this. Disgusting.

Everyday lately I learn things that are hard to believe. There's no nice way to say this but, the message the politicians got from the last election is that the voters will not hold them responsable for their actions. Therefore, neither party acts responsabily. The worst in both parties will continue to be seen. The American people are not going to hold the politicans responsable for anything until there is real pain in the heartland. We must prevent bad effects with out efforts as much as we can. 2006 is going to be a crucial midterm.

That is 'with OUR efforts' in the second to last sentence of course.

I know Cramer has plenty of $$$ in his war chest. The Repubs gave him a scare several years ago, but since then he has been voting with them and is pretty well safe because he brings home the bacon. However, they have been messing with him over the committee that controls the NASA budget (Marshall Space Flight Center is talking about reductions in force) and the new Base Realignment and Closure stuff. If the Repubs really want him out, they will hurt the big employers in his district. So, a little time will tell.

Duckman, I would like to do better, but right now I feel like have no power, strength or vigor. Hopefully that will change tomorrow.

Congressman Kevin Brady of Texas was the only Rebublican to vote against both these bills. Could we trade one of these 31 so-called Dems for Mr. Brady?

Here's my letter to my Congresscritter --

Congressman Edwards, (or person who reads this)

I am writing about my disappointment in learning that you voted in favor of the GOP-sponsored bankruptcy bill.

First, let me tell you that I have been a supporter of yours for years and was thrilled to finally be able to vote for you (or any Democrat for that matter) as my Congressman. After years of the likes of Phil Gramm, Joe Barton, and John Carter, you have certainly been a breath of fresh air.

I also understand your need and personal desire to be a centrist in this Republican-infested area. I applaud your stand against Mr. Bush's Social Security privatization scheme, and I am glad you have fought against this administration's cynical use and abuse of our armed forces. Furthermore, as a graduate and employee of Texas A&M, I appreciate your efforts on the university's behalf.

However, the bankruptcy bill seems incredibily hard-hearted and tilted strongly in favor of credit card companies and banks. I know they argue that people take advantage of the system, but people will always take advantage of any system put in place.

As I'm sure you know, a large percentage of people who file for bankruptcy do so because of high medical expenses. My wife and I came uncomfortably close to the problems these folks face during the past year when I contracted a mysterious liver disease that was apparently caused by exposure to some sort of toxin. I was unable to work for more than four months, and came extremely close to having to have a liver transplant. Eight months after contracting the disease, I am still not completely well. Luckily for me, I have a job that had a sick leave pool and very good insurance. If I didn't have those safeguards, I would have at least lost 4 months of salary, (if not my job) and had incurred medical bills totalling $25,000. If I had to have a liver transplant, we would have gone close to $250,000 in debt.

My wife and I both have good jobs, but with student loan and house payments, we probably would not have been able to pay for my treatment, and very possibly may have had to file for bankruptcy - something I would hate to do.

I can't understand why the Democratic Party can't show the American people that the GOP does not have their best interests at heart. How hard is it to stand up and say that unless people who are forced to file for bankruptcy because of medical problems, or because of being called up by the military (both were Democratic amendments voted down by the GOP) are protected, that Democrats will stand with people, not corporations? I really think if Congressional Democrats show some solidarity, you can starkly contrast which party is on the side of average Americans and residents of the Brazos Valley.

Remember, working with the GOP will not get you very far. They come after anyone who tries to approach them in a "bipartisan" manner. Just ask former Sen. Cleland of Georgia. Sadly, these aren't my father's moderate Republicans.

I'm sorry to write such a long letter, but I want to continue supporting you. Votes like today's make it difficult.

Sincerely,

SC

Anon:

How does the ABA get tarred for this? Officially, they took no position on the bill and they certainly didn't lobby in favor.

Really?

They issued a statement of strong support when it cleared the Senate.

They touted the fairness in the bill just this Tuesday.

And they commended Congress today for passing it.

And they have bought the GOP on this issue for the last several cycles.

In short, they have been a leading supporter of bankruptcy reform.

SC, excellent letter.

Great letter SC, and I will soon write something similar to Chet. I'm in the new 6 and the old 24, so unlike you I lost my good congressman and got one corrupt SOB. However, I sent Chet a check, so I plan to write him as you and express my opinion.

Judith, thanks for the nod!

I never said it would be easy. I think that's the biggest thing I'm going to try to get answered, with little expectation of getting satisfied.

Maybe I'll pass out your letter, SC, unless you object. We need some better answers, and that might get some.

As I read this, I'm opening up my mail, and there's crap from all these convention people. Bill Lockyear sent me a lovely big envelope full. But Bill voted for schwarzenkopf during the recall. There ain't no effing way he's getting my support, and if I see him, I'll tell him that.

My thought is that a lot of these people still think it's a game to be played, that was Lockyear's attitude about his vote anyway. Until they feel the pain, face the real consequences, that won't change.

It isn't just Congress and pols, though. That's what bushco taps into, the no responsibility attitude of this country. It's all just a big effing game. The presidential horse race, the final four, the dramatic backdrops and the stentorian pronouncements, "Terri Schiavo, Race against Time" or "THE WAR IN IRAQ - Operation Iraqi Freedom." How or when that changes, I don't know. But it will.

Personal responsibility party my ass. So there's your spin on the bankrupt bill, Judith. It's going to teach Americans the ugly truth about reality. It's going to be untidy. And then maybe we can inflict those same messy lessons on the politicians. $3 gas ain't gonna play well in Peoria. Massive credit card payoffs while you can't charge a tank of gas without a co-signer ain't gonna play well either.

So I'll see what's up in Smogville, and let you know.

Amusing to see some New York Democrats cowed by the big money Wall Street crowd...Who said money can't by you love?

-

Dutch Ruppersberger, Maryland?!
WTF?! He needs to pay

Unlike the Republicans, we don't have the cash to punish every guy/gal who steps out of line by running a primary opponent against them.

But we can pick one particularly nasty example and target that person.

Which of these people (http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004142.php) is the most deserving of losing their primary race next year? Or at least being made to sweat hard? (Note: The person we run MUST be capable of actually winning the seat should he/she win the nomination. No self-destructive protest candidacies, please.)

What's especially disconcerting is that three members of the black cacus, Wynn, Scott and Jefferson, voted for both. I don't count DINO Sanford Bishop, the Michael Jackson of the black caucus.

Carolyn McCarthy? What in God's anme are you thinking about? You and the other 30 so-called Democrats who voted for the bankrupt Bankruptcy Act ought to be ashamed of yourselves. And the co-chair of the DCCC? Please - don't come to me looking for money any more. For years I have argued against any attempts to field a third party. Well, maybe the time has come to go that route. The Domocrats are bending over backwards to help Bush screw the poor, the under-employed, the unemployed, the uninsured, the under-educated, -- hell, everyone except the guys at the very top of the pile. Good work, Dems. I'm sure you got something out of those votes, but what you don't have any longer is my vote, my support.

Steve Israel is my rep, and I just sent him a very angry letter. Over the last two days my estimation of that man has plummeted.

Since the list only includes those who voted for both travesties, it neglects Steny Hoyer (D-MD), who voted for bankruptcy "reform", and is one of the Democratic delegation's whip. There's leadership for ya....

Fuck 'em. I'll never give another dollar to a Democrat, ever. Let the goddam Democratic Party die so we can put the sorry thing behind us.

I'm living in Maine so I can't help directly, but I'm from Texas and have something to say about those alleged Democrats. Chet Edwards is from Waco--it's an act of courage to even CALL yourself a Democrat there, to say nothing of voting like one, so I don't think there's much to gain by going after him.

However, Cuellar and Hinojosa are from the Rio Grande Valley (or "the Valley", in Texan parlance) which is a very safe Democratic-leaning area. They have no excuses whatsoever. They serve a fairly poor, largely Hispanic population, and clearly voted AGAINST the interests of their own constituencies.

I don't know about their local connections, etc., but if either of those guys was replaced by another Democrat in the primary the seat would certainly be held for the Party.

Thanks for taking the time to write that letter, SC.

An "I-CAN'T-GET-THE-REAL-NEWS" letter has been all I've done this year.

Whatsup with that Ken Salazar? Has he represented ANY Dem interests? What do the people of Colorado think? Isn't "Talk Left" out of Colorado? Wonder if they will do a piece on Whatsup With That Salazar?.

If ever there is someone voting against the interest of his district it has to be Sanford Bishop. His district includes several of the poorest counties in the United States, much less Georgia. Lack of industry, lack of employment, lack of proper housing, lack of proper medical care abounds there, but is he concerned? Nah. He's worse than Michael Jackson, worse than Clarence Thomas, worse than Armstrong Williams, worse than Condi Rice, worse even than David Scott (and that's saying something!!!). The pits!!!

You don't have Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan (D-17OH) on the list. According to Thomas.gov, he voted to repeal. Now, we were very suprised by Ryan's vote and it is very out of character, but he apparently did it none the less. Do you know something we don't about what went down with him?

The count should be 32. Robert Brady, Dem Pennsylvania, voted for both, but I didn't see his name on your list.

I gave Bean some money last time around. I think because her candidacy was highlighted by MoveOn or some other liberal organization. Strange. Anyway, I just wrote her a note, and very simply told her that I'd given her money in the past, that these votes disappointed me, and that Democrats have to stand up for the middle class. Polite and to the point. I wonder if I'll get any kind of real response.

According to the LA Times, these California Democrats voted for it but you only list Cardoza and Costa.

Joe Baca, Dennis A. Cardoza, Jim Costa, Jane Harman, Ellen O. Tauscher and Mike Thompson

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/latimests/20050415/ts_latimes/bankruptcyrequirementstogettougher

"If ever there is someone voting against the interest of his district it has to be Sanford Bishop. His district includes several of the poorest counties in the United States, much less Georgia. Lack of industry, lack of employment, lack of proper housing, lack of proper medical care abounds there, but is he concerned? Nah. He's worse than Michael Jackson, worse than Clarence Thomas, worse than Armstrong Williams, worse than Condi Rice, worse even than David Scott (and that's saying something!!!). The pits!!!"

I don't know about Thomas and Williams, but Bishop makes Harold Ford look like a flaming populist. I agree the guy is the pits. The most conservative elected black democrat ever.

I can't speak for the rest, but as for the two GA "Dems". David Scott is an archconservative Dixiecrat in the Zell Miller style, any attempt to defeat him will yield an archconservative Republican, which is better? In his part of Georgia, there is a 0.00% chance of a liberal winning. Sanford Bishop is a black democrat in a conservative rural southern district. In his last election, he garnered 67% of the vote; however, he outspent the Republican 30:1, clearly he is not a shoe-in if the Republicans spend even a modest amount more than the $22,000 they raised last time. Remember, not all Democrats are progressive liberals, in fact progressive liberals are still a minority of Democrats in the South, something you "northern liberal elitists" should remember when you trumpet party discipline. Party whipping in the 1990's led to Gingrich, Sen. Shelby and about 20 more democrats to switch parties. Further, the ones who did not switch were defeated in the elections from 1990-2000 by equally conservative (if not more so) Republicans.

Gee, Joe, us "northern liberal elitists" are fighting *for* the average guy against the economic elite in both the estate tax and bankruptcy bill battles. Turncoats like Bishop and Scott are cited with Republican economic philosophy over their party's historical economic philosophy. Bishop represents one of the poorest districts in the county. This is not some "cultural" issue, or defense spending. If they can't vote the right way on this, then what's the point of them being in the party. At least I thought one of the benefits of the 1990 redistricting would have been more progressive Democrats in the south. But Bishop and Scott vote much the same as their predecessors.

Paleo, I don't disagree with you, in fact I am very much against the bankruptcy bill. My point was that when you look at many districts in the south (in particular) you have the option of a conservative democrat or a conservative republican (no true liberal has a showball's chance in hell of garnering more than 10%), between the two I will take a conservative D because at least they will vote with the dems on procedural issues, etc. I was responding to the posters who were saying that the Dems should just get rid of these Congressman. From a pragmatic standpoint, whoever replaces a David Scott or a Sanford Bishop WILL be worse because that is what the district will except. On the other hand, if Democrats nationally were able to reinvent themselves as the party of the average person, then I agree that it would be worthwhile to challenge any sitting Dem or GOPer in any district that is as anti-consumer as the Banruptcy bill suggests the members are. To get off on a tangent, the Dems need to redefine the debate to win back the hearts and minds of Americans by shaping the debate about the defender of the "average person" around economics, since the GOP has that label for culture and values, which will not change in the forseeable future.

P.S. - my "northern liberal elitist" was meant as an allusion to the image problem of the Democratic party everywhere else and, as I said, nothing else electorally will change in the South until that label can be changed (by changing the debate to economic policy, specifically the threat of big corporations to the average worker)

Sanford Bishop represents the 21st poorest congressional district in the country. There is no way he would have suffered politically for voting the other way on the estate tax and the bankruptcy bill. There is no excuse for his vote.

I'm sure it would not have hurt him politically, but financially, I'm not so sure (opensecrets.org)

I think you've stumbled on the main reason. Sanford must have been a streetwalker in a prior life.

Although a lot of people seem to have commented on this list being incomplete, I would also like to point out that a whole lot more of these Dem's are actually Blue Dogs and the group's website has a flimsy defense of their postion written to Speaker Hastert asking for him to expedite a vote on the Bankruptcy Bill.

I am "represented" by "Bud" Cramer, AL5th. He does not pay much attention to my mail to him, esp. on this topic.

He does represent a district that could very easily be repuglican. This was a done deal. I guess his voting against working folks gives him some cover in his district.

I think Joe's comments about some Southern districts apply to Melissa Bean's district (previously represented by Phil Crane) as well . . .

Rick Larsen may have just signed his political death warrant.

The religous right in his CD have been making steady gains in local races over the last few years, and there is a serious divide between moderate and progressive Democrats, held together only by their mutual dislike of the local Repugs and a couple of lackluster Congressional candidates.

His vote on these two bills, plus his actions regarding Iraq, pretty much guarantee a primary challenge or a walkaway come the general election.

Rat Bastards all of them. There is no reason why anyone who calls themselves a Democrat to vote to repeal the estate tax unless of course it was in their own self-interest to do so. Are we talking Congressmen with hefty estates they wish to pass on unencumbered by such notions as wealth distribution?

Let's be honest here a minute: Neither the Democratic or Republican parties have done fuck for the working classes in over a decade.

Politicians of all stripes simply do not care - and hell, perhaps they wish to keep the poor, poor, because who else is going to join up to be cannon fodder in our crusades?

"My point was that when you look at many districts in the south (in particular) you have the option of a conservative democrat or a conservative republican (no true liberal has a showball's chance in hell of garnering more than 10%), between the two I will take a conservative D ..."

Yes - and the poor in his district do not have a snowballs chance in hell of getting ahead in this world when their politicians continue to undermine them for the sake of the wealthy few. What is the point of having a Democrat representing that district when he votes for bills that ultimately hurt his district and the country?

Ah fuck it - the country is broken. Marry a European and flee.

correct me if i'm wrong but didn't you miss
MICHAEL MICHAUD "demo-repub" maine-- i believe he voted for the bill also.

If they vote with the Republicans, then what good are they?

There are more poor and middle class than there are wealthy in almost every district. We just need to get them to vote and vote for us.

The last election, I went into chatrooms and talked about voting to get a general idea what people were talking about.

They said things like, "There is no difference in the Republicans and the Democrats except the democrats want abortion, gay marriage and want to take away our guns.

But this time there is a difference. People do vote with their pocketbooks. They don't like the high gas prices and most don't like them messing with their Social Security.

The truth is though I think we will be sold out by the Democrats. Blanche Lincoln has already said, "We will be more thoughtful about our "changes" than the Republicans. They are going to deal with the Republicans if they take Privatization off of the table.

We need to get our own Media. Fox News exists only to promote the Republican Agenda.

The right have the preachers passing out checklists on who is the most moral. There is websites that say "Would a Christian vote for a Democrat?

We are going to have to give up the abortion issue, the gay marriage issue and any gun law. Anyway, it gives me great satisfation to think everyone is fully armed if these people stay in power. lol

With the new pill, and legal contracts and the NRA letting that ruin the party is not worth it.

Keeping those three issues, even weakened, are like giving them bullets to shoot us with. If you notice if they can't argue a point they hit us with one of those issues.

The Republicans don't broadcast their agenda. They didn't say we will start wars, we will put through bills that will hurt the middle class etc.

We can give the new Democrats an ultimatum. They are either with us or against us. We could join up with the green party and other parties and start a new party.

The New Democrats have a legal right to any money donated to the Democratic Party. So I am giving to the people I want to run, not the party. It would be best if the Democratic Party would let us designate whether we want the New Democrats to have any of our donation.

The Media and the administration are now starting in on pushing a flat tax. I am already amazed at how many think that think the flat tax would be a good idea.

We need to fight it tooth and nail like we have Social Security.

I donated to Move On because they are going to start running ads against those who vote against the middle class programs.

I think we have a "Millionaire's Club" government that have decided that we have to compete and we have to cowtow to the wealthy to keep them from leaving the country. We could end that by not buying products from any rich American that leaves this country and don't pay their fair share of the taxes.

Right now, I am furious at the New Democrats. Their vote is like a slap in the face. I think I could almost vote for a Republican with a big cigar screaming "I love Jesus" easier than I can vote for my New Democrat Representative Blanche Lincoln.

the bastards, thanks for naming them.

Those people are scum.

Don't forget the Senators:

Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Byrd (D-WV)
Carper (D-DE)
Conrad (D-ND)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV)
Salazar (D-CO)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Clinton (D-NY)

Some girl wrote that the reason Dems vote like this is "they're all whores, just like the Republicans." This isn't true. There are many Democrats that are on our side. One thing is clear, there is a split in the Democratic party between the real heart of the party, and the DLC bagmen and they're pro war ideas.
The DCCC will make the right choice. As long as we keep holding a fire up to these traitor Democrats that vote for the welfare of corporate cronyism. For some real shocking statitistics on the sharp increase in corporate facism, go here...

http://www.sharedcapitalism.org/scfacts.html

Imposters, fools, sabotuers or all of the above?

a Neodem is not a Democrat. They are a defacto branch of the Republican party.

why do we allow these cheap knockoffs to wear the Brandname?

Is there no point when their membership card can be revoked?

If not then there is no Real Democratic party and Real Democrats need to pick a new party name, copyright it and move forward.

If it is not ours then we better face it and regroup. Coke and Nike wouldnt last long if just anyone could put out just anything with their brand name on it.

You easily forget that these people were not elected to represent the Democratic Party! They were elected to represent the people of their districts and their state. Focus and rip on your representatives, not everyone elses!

IN RE THE FOLLOWING LOSER:

Brian Baird (D-WA), U.S. House of Representatives

Your list of losers failed to include Congressman Brian Baird (D-WA), who shamefully voted for the bankruptcy bill, as did his fellow Washington State Democrat, Rick Larsen (who is listed).

Fortunately, the rest of the Washington State delegation -- including our two Senators, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell -- voted against this vile piece of predatory legislation.

A brief visit to Brian Baird's webpage will reveal that this sycophantic Republican-in-Democrat's clothing has accepted, literally, gobs of money in political contributions from the finance, real estate, and lending industries.

Brian Baird is a Democrat who serves his corporate masters well and does so to the detriment of the hapless middle-class voters who sent him to Congress.

PLEASE:

Add this rotton, arrogant, greed-driven bastard to your list of losers -- Brian Baird deserves his place in the Hall of Shame!

Thanks.

Paleo:

For the Black Caucus, there were seven members who voted for that Bankruptcy Bill. The ones not included on this list, besides Jefferson, Bishop, Wynn and Scott are:

Harold Ford (Tennessee)
Kendrick Meek (Florida)
Gregory Meeks (New York)

Ford was expected cause he signed off on the letter to Hastert, urging the bill's passage. Meek (Florida) is a surprise cause he tends to vote progressive. Meeks (New York) was also expected; like Ford, he signed off on the letter to Hastert regarding the bill.

CBC needs new leadership - for the most part, their refusal to point out how these SOBs continue to vote against their constituent's best interests while lining their pockets with special interest cash and aligning with the GOP speaks volumes.

Of course, they hope that their constituents are too stupid to take notice...

Steve -

Your stance about the ABA is just plain wrong. Not only did the ABA take no stance on the estate tax repeal (which actually gives lawyers less to do), they were very opposed to the bankruptcy bill, due to the attorney liability provisions included. Not only does the bill make it harder for people to qualify for Chapter 7, it makes fewer attorneys likely to do them, and increases the costs associated with doing so, leading to higher fees.

Now, your point about the Dems is correct, and they should all be strung up (politically speaking, of course) for voting this way. Just don't lump us lawyers in with MBNA and the uber-wealthy.

I'm normally represented by Steve Israel. I wrote to him about my disappointment with his vote on this bill. I didn't accept his explanation for it. I posted about it on my blog. At the same time, I do want to say that I don't think that he'll cave on Social Security. In fact, he has publicly stated that "The Social Security issue is the defining moment between our core values and their core values." I'm as unhappy as anyone with the bankruptcy vote, but it's more in sorrow than in anger that I approach some of them, knowing that they're not all bad guys, but they just don't "get" this issue. We need to rehabilitate them.

It's worth noting that when Steve Israel dicussed the Social Security issue it was the number one question on the minds of the constituents at an event he was at. No one asked about the bankruptcy bill and it wasn't much in the news at that point. I think we didn't do as much advance lobbying on that one as we might have.

If there's one lesson that we can learn from the Repugnicans, it's that if we are going to present a consistent message and image, we must lose the dead baggage. Up until now, the Democratic party has been willing to endorse anyone willing to call themselves a Democrat and who had a chance of winning. During the far Right's climb to power, they challenged incumbents that did not support their message. We must do the same. Let Joe Lieberman et al run as the Repugnicans they are.

Why does it necesarily have to be all for one or none at all?

I don't know enough specifics of that bill to debate for or against it, but do Democrats have to all vote Democrat and vise versa?

If that's the point why not just flip a coin once a year to see which party get to be in charge?

DND--Do Nothing Democrats-and they wonder why they are sinking so fast.

So If You walk up and kick both parties in the Shins,

Would You?