Rahm calls Dems attacking "Dems" "Fucking Stupid"

http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/08/07/rahm-goes-apeshit-on-liberals-in-the-veal-pen/

So tell me, isn't this what HE'S DOING??? A "Dem" attacking other Dems, even though we liberals and progressives are just such pesky scum.

Jane Hamsher: Veal pen? :rofl:

edit, spell trolls

Some happen to call themselves "Democrats" - but they ain't. Even if Emmanuel picked them himself.

or the more definitive term for them all is "corporatists". Rahm, true Democrats aren't corporatists, no matter what your inner desires are...

" Sources at the meeting tell me that Emanuel went on a tirade against the Dem-versus-Dem attacks, calling them “f–king stupid.” This was a direct attack on some of the attendees in the room, who are running ads against Dems right now.

Tellingly, Rahm raised the specter of a loss on health care, sources at the meeting say — which suggests that the White House may be less certain about victory than officials allow publicly.

“He started out with, `We’re 13 and 0 going into health care,’” one source at the meeting said, meaning that Rahm was touting the White House’s string of pre-health care legislative victories."

only cares about numbers, doesn't it?

lol

WTF have they really accomplished, other than to spread a couple trillion specimens of soon to be worthless dollar bills around corporate boardrooms, worldwide?

Yes, I'll spell it out!

We just expect them to DO THE RIGHT EFFING THING!

13 and 0. If it's corporations vs working Americans.

How do you pronounce F***g?

:rofl:

Fuckg

Deal with it.

:rofl:

officials and citizens at town meetings all over the country Dems attacking dems is stupid cowardly and self-defeating.

There are plenty of republicans and right-wingers to attack.

the concerns of everyday people being served at all because the corporate interests have the field.

Good grief.

a cause and effect you know for sure. Fine, that is your conjecture. My conjecture is that attacking Dems just gives Republicans a free pass and makes it harder for Obama administration to persuade the fence - sitting Dems to support his plan.

Go look up their campaign donors and see what you think the odds are. I'm not imaginative enough to make this up.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=H01

that if we stop the pressure (referring to the OP theme of dems attacking dems) that nothing will change. Pressure is fine but Rahm was referring to attacking dems.

You have to think about basing assumptions on OpenSecrets. When people donate to politicians and note their occupation they get lumped into general categories. Nursing assistants get lumped in with Big Pharma executives.

That would be attacking Dems...Right! Well IMO when they take such large sums from the Health Care Insurance Industry and then try a kill real reform it is obvious they are on the take. I take exception to you defending such action for no other reason than Party Loyalty. It offends me.

Calling, writing, reasonable disagreement blogging etc are all absolutely necessary. Attack ads does Republicans work for them. I am positing that this will HURT the effort for health reform. That is why I think Rahm is correct.

Make no mistake, it's the Blue Dogs that are preventing meaningful health care reform.

So no, he's not right.

groups are indiscriminate -- DFA floated ads against Kerry who is FOR the public option for example. I contributed to DFA never expecting that they would do something that stupid. Blogs trash Maria Cantwell assuming she is against public option when she is FOR public option. The other thing is that while the foot dragging democrats could be convinced in negotiations -- publicly attacking them is likely to make them defensive. Obama can work with foot draggers - he doesnt need a barrage of petulant self-identified progressives making his job more difficult.

These are sidebar concerns though. The main concern is that attacking Dems totally gives Republicans, who genuinely are obstructionist, a free pass.

Democracy for America (DFA) was attacking Kerry. They ran a poll contest to pick a Senator to run attack ads against re health care. Max Baucus narrowly edged out Kerry as public enemy #1 on the DFA polls. That would have been a total misfire since Kerry is unequivocally for a public option. I think that Kerry, Dodd, and Pelosi tend to be easy scapegoats for more petulant activists that dont have guts or curiosity to go after the real culprits

who gets the most $$ from the healthcare industry - not on the Senator's stated position on the public option. I answered the poll based on stated position, Baucus, Lincoln (D-WalMart), and one other, not Kerry.

Edited to correct typo.

wow.

In case you haven't noticed, Republicans, Inc. are having quite a mountain of trouble attacking themselves right now. The party is in tatters. Half of them are attacking the other half.

There's a free pass that didn't come from progressives.

squads can be counterproductive. The free pass from the progressives is that many save their ammunition to attack people who are on the side. They should be running ads vs Republicans.

against Repukes for almost 9 years. With very good results, i.e., 2006 elections, 2008 elections. Included would be huge support for Obama, myself included.

Progressives have worked their butts off for Democrats.

That does not mean they are going to sit back and be trashed by Rahm and/or the WH !

being counterproductive when they run ads v. Dems. The voting on Democracy for America targeting Kerry (a public option supporter) as the #2 obstruction to health reform shows just how widely they can misfire in petulance. I am a long time activist supporter but like critics of fence-sitting Dems, I can be critical of activists when I feel they are acting stupidly.

obstructionists no better than the Republicans. In fact they are a hell of a lot more dangerous as they have actual power unlike the Republicans.

when they work to kill or weaken reform which Democratic voters overwhelmingly want.

It's past time for progressives to fight back.

Like Rahm says, they would love for us to sit down and shut up and let them push through their watered down, empty "reform". Forget it.

circular firing squad thing only makes it harder for them to resist the thugs.

So time to play some hardball!

initiative has barely been rolling a few months.

This is nothing new.

and even since Washington. The Obama initiatives have not been. BTW I agree with pressuring Dems but I dont agree with either running attack ads or with painting the dems as the main culprits, which is what the activists running the ads are doing. I was on the fence about attack ads in the beginning-- now I agree with Obama. We are doing the repubs work for them.

He needs to tell them to come along or face a primary challenge next election. Their choice.

This is too important to coddle them over. They'll capitulate so much to the Republicans that we will end up a crap bill that will piss everyone off which is exactly what the Republicans want. Then the Republicans will be back in power again for the next 16 years and finally completely tank this nation.

This has to be done and done right. By catering to the Blue Dogs the legislation is going to be screwed up. It's time for 60% approval rating Obama to take the reigns and slap a few people down with newspapers on their wet noses.

some faith in them. I think Rahm want Obama plan (and his own career) to succeed much more than he cares about his moderate ideology and pleasing his blue dogs.

We'll have to wait and see if the final bill contains a public option. Then we'll know.

I still think Rahm needs to work on them without throwing the left under the bus. He takes us just a little too much for granted. If there were any clues whatsoever that they were going to bone up and take care of this that the left would have held back. I think the left got impatient as single payer (which never had a chance) but then the public option started being rumored to be gone.

The public option is the middle ground. Single payer was given up by the left. Now let's see if co-ops are given up by the Blue Dogs.

glad Rahm is a little thuggish given the types of Republicans we are up against -- so I can forgive him his language. But there is absolutely no need to shoot diss left leaning allies.

I understand his (and your) argument. But they need to go after the Blue Dogs to tamp them down so they don't have to go after the left. I think he and Obama could have prevented it from getting to this point and need to take some responsibility for that.

:hi:

'dems' obstructed every attempt to stop George Bush that they could. I don't listen to your kind of argument anymore because it doesn't work. All these bullies understand is the threat of losing their jobs and access to big money and power. They are not persuadable based on concerns about the American people. We have eight years of 'keeping our powder dry', of not 'attacking Dems', of being 'united' even behind the most reprehensible (and I can't think of anything more reprehensible than voting to remove Habeas Corpus, or spying on the American people, or for an illegal war) individuals calling themselves Dems.

What was achieved by caving into these phony Dems? Did we save one single life, stop one torture victim from abuse, achieve the passage of one piece of legislation (please, don't bother with the Minimum Wage disaster) that benefited the American people? What did real Democrats ever get by doing it your way, by coddling these recalcitrant, obstructionists?

I'm for changing tactics and letting them know that Rahm's coddling of them is not going to work anymore, and insulting 'liberals' as he and they have a tendency to do, is getting old and has little effect anymore.

So, Rahm is wrong. When people DO wrong you don't let them get away with it if you want a successful society. That is what is wrong with this society.

Let's start catering to those who got it right all along for a 'change'!

not to Blue Dogs. I dont equate the two. Some people do.

and his minions doing what you are doing right now, each time we witnessed another Bush Bill pass with support from them, those minions were in threads like this, trying to 'calm down those rabid liberals' and get them to vote for 'democrats' no matter how much they supported Bush's agenda.

I have been there for the full eight years and although I did fall for the 'logic' of getting a Dem majority in the past, it was with the understanding that something would be accomplished by it and those treasonous 'Dems' who supported Bush's agenda would be warned that once we had that majority, their support for Republicans would no longer be tolerated.

And here we are again, listening to the same old 'manupalitive' propaganda. I know what's right, I tried your way and it didn't work, and I feel guilty for going along while people were dying and being tortured as if we had time to wait.

People are dying still and I won't listen to the same old garbage ever again, sorry. These blue dog thugs who hate everything we stand for, need to be told what is expected of them now and reminded that we have not forgotten their betrayals but won't be giving them a pass anymore, as it gained us nothing in the end.

I knew it was never wise to betray one's principles all in the name of 'pragmatism' but I gave it a try, and it failed. Sorry, I'm, no longer persuadable on this issue. People who have done wrong, harmed others, should never ever be coddled as Rahm is doing. He's not up to the job, which is no surprise to those of us who have watched him over the past several years.

not attacking. I would even go so far as to add mocking and hoping to humiliate. . . but attacking? I've not seen a Dem attack a Dem, blue or otherwise, in any manner resembling the attacking you speak of.

Please, many of us are not moved by threats or fear. He's an asshole and he represents what has gone woefully wrong in the party.

They have no power. It is the Blue (Cross) Dems who are holding things up and it is absolutely right to go after them.

Going after Republicans is like beating a dead horse.

Running ads against these guys at home is nothing but counter-productive.

Attack Republicans not Democrats.

with their own extremist Fundie Racist Homophobe candidate and thus alienate their moderates even more, who are still pretty heavily invested (in more ways than just $$$) in the Blue Dog. I admit it wouldn't do any good if the Blue Dog lost too many of his Leftie Democrats, but if the RWingers thought a Blue Dog was weak, couldn't they go for broke on their intent to take over the Republican Party?

If the Blue Dogs are truly still "Democrats", why do they have their own party whip?

What about:
The War In Iraq?

In 2007, 15 Blue Dog Coalition Members in safe seats refused to contribute party dues to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. An additional 16 Blue Dogs have not paid any money to the DCCC but were exempt from party-mandated contributions because they were top GOP targets for defeat in 2008. The stated reason for the party dues boycott are remarks made by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) encouraging leaders of anti-war groups to field primary challenges to any Democrat who does not vote to end the war in Iraq. Woolsey later stated that she was misunderstood, but the Blue Dogs have continued with the boycott. Donations to party Congressional Committees are an important source of funding for the party committees, permitting millions of dollars to be funneled back into close races.

Warrantless Wiretaps?
41 out of 231 House Democrats voted for the "Protect America Act", which included actions such as warrantless wiretapping. These include official Blue Dog members Rep. John Barrow, Jim Cooper, Jim Costa, Henry Cueller, and so on all the way down the alphabet.

Blue Dogs and other "conservative Democrats" supported the infamous Contract on America. They called President Clinton "too liberal", a comment which I hope I don't have to expound upon on DU.

Zell Miller, a "conservative Democrat", seemed to have a moment of clarity when he gave a speech at the 2004 RNC. He later went on Hardball with Chris Matthews and proceeded to tell Chris to "get out of his face" (the interview was via satellite) and lamented about how he "wish(ed) we lived in the day where you could challenge a person to a duel."

Alabama Senator Richard Shelby spent over a decade as a "conservative Democrat". He later chose to tell the truth and switch to the Republican Party.

I'm not so sure that these ads are being run against Democrats.

{ETA: PM me for my address Rahmster, I'm sure you wanna send me "a fuckin' dead fish" now}

If you're reading. Or if your minions are.

We're here. We've been here. We're not going anywhere. We are the people who voted for change. We expect change. If we don't get change, there's going to be more change.

I've used it so many times that I'm going to stop attributing it to Dr. Dean.

The Left is way way more important and powerful than he might think. IMHO.

voting against my interests.

I have zero problem supporting Democrats who speak and vote like Democrats.

Seems simple enough.

I can never read it too many times.

No matter how anyone *feels* about it, isn't it important stuff?

joining us with their humble opinions.

This is very important stuff!

Interesting.

He has no right attacking other Dems.

attacking dems. Rahm didnt start it.

appreciate how absurd it can get - what ever side you are on

is so highly personal with me--I knew Obama wasn't a liberal but I supported him. I, along with many progressives, did not expect to be the enemy of a centrist corporate administration.

See Dean quote. Repeat.

my background on the issue. Taking care of poor people for 30 yrs. Working in public / community health and dealing with crappy insurance companies daily. Kerry's daughter, who influences his health policy, worked as a doctor in our hospital busiest and poorest clinic. I know he is 100% committed to a full public option and DFA really turned me off on this type of attack dems first action when the decided to target him.

Mostly, if I believed attacking dems really worked, I would probably feel differently. I dont believe they do and crappy attacks like DFA on Kerry and ubiquitous blog attacks on Dodd and Pelosi (both public option advocates) for not being strong enough advocates leads me to believe such attacks are too petulant and will ultimately be self-defeating. This is why I agree with Rahm that such attacks are stupid.

We RESPONDED to them attacking progressive health care reform. So whatever cycle this is, it is they that started to attack Democratic principles! Had they would have voted with the Dems and not tried to obstruct us on health care reform, this wouldn't have happened!

different from attacking us. I would have agreed less with Rahm until I saw some of the attacks. I donate to liberal activist causes and some groups know what they are doing and some are self defeating.

Have we asked them to be *arrested* yet? Those trying to be a part of the hearings were just trying to argue policy too, and they were ATTACKED by Baucus's "rules".

their policy position they were arrested for being disruptive. Over reaction for sure but not an arrest for their policy.

That was denied by Senator Baucus. They were only "disruptive" trying to be heard. Had a democratic means been available to them to be heard, they wouldn't have been "disruptive". They were being "disruptive" to have a different viewpoint heard (which they had no other alternative to do so), not to squash others' viewpoints. There's a difference.

That problem was started by Baucus.

;)

I guess the DLC needs to pay better.

:woohoo:

I think sometimes people hit unrecommend when they don't like a story (like the thread on Palin criticizing health care reform).

I can't imagine many people here actually support Rahm on this.

and the rest of his responsibilities should be reassigned to someone with moral fibre.

somebody with a calculator for a brain, constantly assessing how many votes for this, how many votes for that, ad naseum, whose arm to twist, what 4-letter words to use. Etc.



whose

progressive agenda was doomed. This guy spent his career OPPOSING it and then he's elevated to that position. Oy vey!

when this jerk was appointed. He hates what he sees as 'the left'. He helped get some of those Blue Dogs elected and tried to take credit for Dean's 50 state project. He's just another 'R' with a 'D' after his name. There are so many of them, they have a few issues they don't really care about, like abortion, which allows them to claim they are 'left' or 'democrats'. They've probably done more harm that actual Republicans because they were better able to influence a reluctant base to 'be patient' each time some of them helped Bush get his disastrous policies and nominees through Congress.

No one on the 'left' would have listened to a Repub, but fake Dems managed to convince the base of the party to reluctantly vote for some of them even after such criminal legislation as the MCA was helped along by 12 Dem Senators. I remember the push to just 'vote Dem' and then when we get a majority, we'll fix things. That was over 2 years ago and so far, we're still waiting.

I have as much interest in anything Rahm has to say as I would in what George Bush has to say. The day he stands up for real Democrats will be a cold day in hell.

that's a good one.

attacks on the Democratic base. Let him for once, support the people who put him where he is. He forgets who hired him and who can fire him.

He spend nearly a million to defeat a progressive Dem who had come close to unseating Hastert in 2004.

It just doesn't seem like a very smart political strategy.

It would be one thing if he was really working to fight for and support the central concerns of the Democratic wing of the Democratic party. But he is not. He's constantly bending over for the Blue Dogs and telling us to shut up. I am an ardent Obama supporter, but I'm f*cking sick of being treated like the red-headed stepchild.

For pete sakes Rahm get a f*cking backbone and stop acting like Obama has a 20% approval rating. Tell the Blue Dogs this isn't about their f*cking next election. This is about the f*cking American people and their f*cking needs and what they f*cking voted for. If you don't want Progressives to "attacked" Blue Dogs then toughen up and f*cking reign them in. We f*cking elected Obama to overcome the garbage that Republican party left us not to cater to and coddle Democrats that imitate or cower before them. If you were doing your job Rahm, there would be no need for "Dems to attack Dems." Ever f*cking think about that?"

Just say to yourself Rahm: "Yes we f*cking can! Yes we can start acting like Democrats! Yes we can grow a spine. Yes we can stop capitulating. Yes we can tell the Blue Cross Dogs that when they run for reelection that Obama, the DNC and the DSCC will be campaigning for their primary challenger." I know that number 60 is important to you. But it's worthless if you don't f*cking use it.

And Rahm, it's not helpful to spit on the people who brought cha. Just f*cking saying.

Note: I don't usually do a lot of swearing in my posts, but I wanted Rahm to be able to understand it if he happens to read it.

by sitting on it.

nt

How silly of us progressives of us to think that they work for us and should have to earn our support.

We get beer at the White House!

Woo Hoo!

buses to throw us under?

f'ing stupid:)

what goes around, comes around, Rahm

Total fucking corporation fellating Repukes the rest of the time.

nt

Come join the majority, Rahm.

they're doing a great job.

Spending tens of millions in the process as well.

Oh, and fuck you, you blue dog whore for the corporations.

No wonder the Republics are so pissed at Dems - at least, with their own party, they expect the lies and direct corporate funding.

Oh, and can I say again, go fuck yourself Rahm.

But really, we could do without him, we really could.

that hates us?

Do we actually always agree or does it just seem that way?

lol

:hi:

Let's see what that attitude will do for the 2010 and 2012 elections.

On edit - this picture was taken at the inauguration - not too professional there Rahm.

Now what?