About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
 William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes

Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster

Special Elections
- Strafford 03Bob Perry
- Hills 03Peter Leishman

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Getting Rid of the Democratic Party?

by: Jennifer Daler

Sat Feb 19, 2011 at 07:21:17 AM EST
The unrest in Wisconsin appears to be about public workers' benefits, unions, and collective bargaining. And all those issues are there, the last one being the most important. But Rachel Maddow pointed out another issue, a more nefarious one, to be sure. She says that this isn't only or even mainly about these things, but about destroying the Democratic Party by cutting off its funding sources.

This is long but worth watching.

Back home in New Hampshire, we are being bombarded by a blitzkreig of crazy. From defunding Planned Parenthood, and  NHPTV, to taking away civil rights from a group of people (or better yet, taking marriage away from everybody), taking NH out of the Regional Greehouse Gas Initiative, attempting to remove a sitting Rep for no reason, starting a state militia. The list is seemingly endless.

Here is a list of bills affecting NH election law.  The main goal is to disenfranchise potential Democratic voters.

We need to be awake to this now and resist this attempt to turn us into a one party system.

Oh, and why is it that when the Democrats are in power, there is endless talk of "bipartisanship", "working together" and "agreeing to disagree", and  when the Republicans win, they apply their steel toed jack-boots to  the Democrats' collective jugular and press down? And the press calls it the "normal strategy" of the winners.
Jennifer Daler :: Getting Rid of the Democratic Party?
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Getting Rid of the Democratic Party? | 12 comments
A couple of points (0.00 / 0)
1. Yes, in general that's true. The GOP is going after us, and our constituencies.

2. It's less of a strategy than the 11th Commandment in full force. Things like going after student voting -- the moderate elements of the GOP know that's a losing argument, but they are unwilling to call out the extremes, for fear of the RINO label. On the craven side, they also know they might benefit.

3. We're too quick to declare something an all-out war. During the healthcare debate, the engaged members of the debate would occasionally say things like "Failure of this bill will sink the Obama presidency." (To me that argues for a better bill, but I digress.) That was never true, but it was an effective clarion call. Though the older I get, the more I feel like exaggerated claims hurt us in the long run. Anyway -- they're not out to destroy us.

3b. Well, perhaps better put, they are out to destroy us. But this isn't really news. It's a Civil Cold War in a relatively stable country. A small but important distinction, in my opinion.


The object is to destroy popular government. (4.00 / 1)
The people are enemy number one.  But, since it wouldn't be politic to say that, they target surrogates--immobilize one group at a time.
[ Parent ]
Thanks for clearing that up (4.00 / 1)
So apparently the purpose of government employee unions is to funnel money from the taxpayers back to the Democratic party so they can increase spending so that more goes back to the Democratic party?

Thanks for clearing that up.

No (0.00 / 0)
The purpose of the Democratic Party is to protect the rights of workers.

The other party has no interest in workers; it wants to protect the rights of management.

[ Parent ]
More accurate is (4.00 / 1)
that the purpose of corporations is to funnel taxpayer money back to the Republican party so that they can increase spending to transfer the wealth of the middle class (what's left) to the pockets of the rich, who then provide campaign contributions (now anonymously) to Republican candidates.Round and round we go, while our economy, which depends on a healthy middle-class, goes down and down in a death spiral, taking the corporations down with it eventually, but not before there is lots of money in overseas bank accounts.
In other words, Democrats build the middle class and the economy, while Republicans destroy the middle class and the economy.
But details.
[ Parent ]
I got to watch the clip (0.00 / 0)
Well worth it.

And by the way (0.00 / 0)
Why haven't we heard more about the tax break?

[ Parent ]
Because it doesn't (0.00 / 0)
fit in with the "greedy public employee" meme. They're the new "welfare queens" dontcha know.
[ Parent ]
Right To Work For Less (0.00 / 0)
http://www.bluehampshire.com/s...
The rub is that Republicans want to reduce the power of Unions so that they cannot collect from non-members, and thereby lower the Union's income, and hence its ability to support Democrats(mainly).


When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. HST
They want to destroy union because there's power in union. (0.00 / 0)
Traditional marriage, btw, is not a union of equals.  It's a hierarchy with a dominant male.
[ Parent ]
Why are Democrats treated differently? (0.00 / 0)
It's called being objective.  People are treated as they deserve to be treated.  Equal treatment is antithetical to the conviction that people get what they deserve.
When people get what they deserve, then the people who give it to them are not responsible.
Scott Walker is a nastier (0.00 / 0)
version of Craig Benson. This shows that the fight in Wisconsin is not over fiscal issues.

According to a 2008 Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel (MJS) article,which exposed Walker's illicit personal staff raises, one aide was to achieve a 26% increase - solely initiated and approved by Walker - even though the staffer, Tom Nardelli, was to receive tax-payer funded pensions that would exceed $35,700 a year. A member of the Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors called Nardelli's salary increase "obscene," according the MJS.

In his stand-off as the point man for the Koch Brothers, Dick Armey, and the national Republican Party, Walker is doing in 2011 what he did in 2008: enrich his cronies and the well-off at taxpayer expense, create a budget crisis, and then using the budgetary problem that he is responsible for to crush the unions.

Getting Rid of the Democratic Party? | 12 comments

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox