Guess who's happy about the election?

[Highwayman]

Originally Posted by Outofdodge

....And a friendly reminder, come January Pelosi's in line behind Cheney for the presidency.....

Now there’s a thought that would make me think about moving to France.

[lurker]

Something I posted on another board this morning made me paws to think.

Hillary wants to move back into the White House and al-Qaeda wants to blow it up.....

I'm still thinking....

[Highwayman]

The Dems are going to be doing a lot of dancing come January. I think it will be the Sidestep.

The Herald - Everett, Wash. - HeraldNet - Snohomish County's online news source
Published: Sunday, November 12, 2006

Democratic backers expect results in Congress

Los Angeles Times

WASHINGTON - After toppling the long-dominant Republicans, the Democratic Party's incoming congressional leaders have found themselves in another difficult struggle - with their own supporters.

Some of the very activists who helped restore the Democrats to a majority in the House and Senate last week are claiming credit for the victories and demanding their due: a set of ambitious - and politically provocative - actions on gun control, abortion, national security and other issues that party leaders fear could alienate moderate voters and leave Democrats vulnerable to GOP attacks as big spenders or soft on terrorism.

The conflict underscores the challenge facing presumed House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Nevada Sen. Harry Reid, the next Senate majority leader, who have pledged in recent days to "govern from the center" following a campaign in which anger over the Iraq war and GOP scandals helped Democrats attract some unusually conservative candidates and a large share of independent voters.

To the leaders of interest groups who are core supporters of the Democratic Party, and who have been barred under Republican rule from the inner sanctums of power, the new Congress means a time for action, not compromise.

Lobbyists for the American Civil Liberties Union, for example, are all but counting on Democrats to repeal the most controversial provisions of the Patriot Act, the anti-terrorist law that critics charge is unconstitutional. They also want to end President Bush's domestic wiretapping program.

"We are not going to let them off the hook," said Caroline Fredrickson, the ACLU's legislative director, of the newly empowered Democratic leaders in Congress. "We will hold their feet to the fire and use all the tools we can to mobilize our members."

Similar vows are coming from lobbyists for abortion rights, who want to expand family-planning options for poor women and scale back Bush's focus on abstinence education, and from gun-control advocates, who hope to revive a lapsed ban on assault weapons. Labor unions, a core Democratic constituency, are demanding universal health care and laws discouraging corporations from seeking cheap labor overseas.

"It's been kind of a drought for 12 years, and there is some pent-up energy," said Bill Samuel, legislative director for the AFL-CIO, the labor federation that has long been a Democratic Party stalwart and spent millions of dollars on get-out-the-vote activities.

Several of the labor movement's goals, such as raising the minimum wage and allowing Medicare to seek discounts on drug prices, are found in the AFL-CIO's brochures and on a Democratic leadership wish list designed to appeal across ideological lines.

Eli Pariser, executive director of the liberal activist group Moveon.org, warned that Democratic leaders would be ill-advised to ignore the party's base.

"A huge number of people were involved in putting them over the top," he said. "There's a huge group of people engaged and energized and ready to support Pelosi and company when they boldly lead - and to hold them to account if they stray."

Democrats face especially acute pressure to redirect U.S. policy in Iraq, which many Democrats say was the most important issue driving the party's victory.

Democratic lawmakers have not unified behind an Iraq policy. If they found common ground with Bush on a continued troop presence, they might fend off future GOP efforts to label them as weak on national security. But they also likely would infuriate a growing anti-war movement that helped propel the party back into power.

"American voters have done their job, now it's time for Congress to do theirs," said Tom Andrews, a former House member who is head of the anti-war group Win Without War. "The message couldn't be clearer. It's time to start the orderly withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Our eyes are on the new Congress."

Planned Parenthood, which advocates abortion rights, pointed to victories by like-minded candidates in conservative states and a rejection by South Dakota voters of a sweeping abortion ban. The result, the group says, should be that Democrats view their causes as mainstream, rather than part of a liberal agenda, and should devote greater funding to contraception and other family-planning services that have been opposed by religious conservatives and scaled back by the Bush administration.

"I honestly believe there was no bigger winner in this election than Planned Parenthood Action Fund and women's health," said Planned Parenthood's president, Cecile Richards, referring to efforts by the group's political arm.

At the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the leading gun-control advocacy group, Paul Helmke has high hopes for the assault-weapons ban - and he, too, can list races where candidates backed by his organization defeated those supported by the National Rifle Association.

But Helmke, the Brady Campaign's president and a former Republican mayor of Fort Wayne, Ind., acknowledged that his challenge is to persuade potentially squeamish Democrats that his cause is not "radioactive."

Many Democratic strategists have come to believe that supporting gun-control laws alienates rural voters and many independents. "Guns are a tricky issue," Helmke said. "But the elections show there's nothing to be afraid of."

A preview of the tussle that awaits Reid and Pelosi has been playing out on the Internet since Election Day, with liberal bloggers decrying party centrists as out of touch with the Democratic majority. The complaints were serious enough to prompt Reid to host a conference call in the wake of the election with more than a dozen of the country's most prominent liberal bloggers.

In the Senate, matters are further complicated by at least five Democrats - nearly 10 percent of the caucus- considering presidential bids in which they may need to win the liberal base to gain the nomination but then campaign to the center in a general election.

Some pragmatists in the party are preparing to press for greater independence.

Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, chairman of the committee that designed the party's Senate campaign strategy, is publishing a book in January expected to lay out a plan for long-term Democratic dominance. He is expected to embrace a philosophy somewhere between the Democrats' old New Deal reliance on government and conservatives' outright disdain for government.

Schumer signaled as much after the election when he called on the party to "push aside the special interests and always keep our eye on the average American family."

HeraldNet: Democratic backers expect results in Congress

[Detector]

Talk about sore losers, what did people expect? The Al Queda's of the world to issue a notice of surrender? it's Propaganda and you dudes are falling for it lock stock and barrell.

Not so much sore as upset. The idea that some thoughtless jerks are playing politics with our country's security for their own selfish gains does tend to make people upset. I realize it's propaganda but what do you suppose is prompting them to use it now? Had the repubs remained in power do you think they would be asking them to stay "so they can kill more Americans" or publicly calling out targets on American shores?

We still have no idea what democrats plan to do but the world has an idea, and it is responding to what they anticipate.

Where I'm upset is that the democrats have put their own agenda above the security of it's own country. Thats really cheap even for politicians. Everyone knows, even if you do make a mistake, you never let the enemy know. The democrats have made sure every mistake made by the Bush administration in Iraq is public knowledge. Thats just stupid. We have lost support from not only fellow Americans but much needed allies as well and put our own troops in more danger all for politics.

I'm not saying those apposed to the war should have kept their mouths shut, but that using propaganda themselves has put America in the cross hairs once again. The democrats tried the proper avenues to gain support for their view and America didn't like it. So they resorted to worldwide humiliation to gain support committing one of the biggest no nos in war for political gain.

Politics/Politicians make me sick to my stomach. I see a very fine line between crime & politics, criminals & politicians. Both are out to get what they want with little regard for who it hurts in the process. The only difference a criminal ignores the law while a politician abuses it for their own gain. There are a few good politicians but they don't stand a change using todays rules of engagement.

Remember the days when a football game was simply two teams relying only their ability to play football to win? Once upon a time politics was the same. May the best team win. Todays we have strategists to look for vulnerabilities that can be exploited to win, and if you can't win on your own merit you resort to making the other team loose. A perfect example of our last election. This is possible because in politics, like football, you must have a winner and a looser. If you can't win just make the other team loose.

[Highwayman]

I don’t think the terrorists really care about Republican or Democrat. They hate all of us. What they would relish is seeing us divided and fighting among ourselves. We just gave them more infighting and in that sense the terrorists won this election.

As much as some want to see us capture or kill OBL doing so will not really make us any safer. Al Queda is world wide so simply conquering a land mass won’t stop them and with the cell structure of their organization cutting off the head won’t stop them either. And Al Queda is not the only terrorist group we need to be concerned with. We are better off killing terrorists by the hundred counts wherever we can find them than chasing around looking for one Osama. And if we do find Osama we might be better off to put a bullet in his head, bury him in an unmarked grave and keep our mouths shut instead of letting his capture become a media circus that inspires his followers.

[The Drifter]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

I don’t think the terrorists really care about Republican or Democrat. They hate all of us. What they would relish is seeing us divided and fighting among ourselves. We just gave them more infighting and in that sense the terrorists won this election.

So i guess we shouldnt have had an election then. Cause elections make us divided, people choosing sides and all. The democratic process should be elimated for the time being.

likewise, if those terrorists take warmth in the division, shouldnt everyone just drop the whole election thing. quit making a big deal about it. cause that's just adding to the division. Because of that, threads like this should cease to be, yes?

[lurker]

Some day we'll have to make that choice. Democracy doesn't last forever.

We're in a struggle to preserve it.

[Detector]

I think democracy has become far better looking in principal than in practice. It about choice but when we allow our choices to be limited it doesn't work.

If only given the choice between spinach and broccoli, my only choice would be not to eat. If the majority felt as I do then, in principal, we should be given a new set of choices, not expected to either eat or go hungry as we practice today. Is it any wonder we have such a low voter turnout? As I've said, a vote option of none of the above would make all the difference.

I see this morning on the news that the democrats are already fighting or who gets the most rope. It may take less time than I thought before America realizes they screwed up on this last election.

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by Detector

.

Where I'm upset is that the democrats have put their own agenda above the security of it's own country. Thats really cheap even for politicians. Everyone knows, even if you do make a mistake, you never let the enemy know. The democrats have made sure every mistake made by the Bush administration in Iraq is public knowledge. Thats just stupid. We have lost support from not only fellow Americans but much needed allies as well and put our own troops in more danger all for politics.

I'm not saying those apposed to the war should have kept their mouths shut, but that using propaganda themselves has put America in the cross hairs once again. The democrats tried the proper avenues to gain support for their view and America didn't like it. So they resorted to worldwide humiliation to gain support committing one of the biggest no nos in war for political gain.
.

So having said this do you think that soldiers have died because of these actions and do you think that this type of stuff puts wind in the sails of the terrorist?

[Army_of_One]

Originally Posted by The Drifter

So i guess we shouldnt have had an election then. Cause elections make us divided, people choosing sides and all. The democratic process should be elimated for the time being.

likewise, if those terrorists take warmth in the division, shouldnt everyone just drop the whole election thing. quit making a big deal about it. cause that's just adding to the division. Because of that, threads like this should cease to be, yes?

Hopefully our Democratic process will go on forever....maybe with a few tweaks here and there (term limits?). You can still have a democratic election without the hate and such. You can say things like..."the Presidients course is doing such and such but this is what we would like to do better.' Instead we get people like Pelosi and Wrangle calling him an idiot in public. That is unprofessional any way you slice it. I may think my BN Commander is an idiot but I would never say that in front of my troops and cripple his ability to lead. That's called professionalism and leadership.