Thursday, May 11, 2006

A REAL Democrat would not have voted for this.

Harold Ford JUNIOR voted for the extension of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy today, joining Marsha Blackburn, Roger Wicker, and 15 other Quisling Democrats to gut the budget.

Yes, it would have passed anyway. That does NOT mean that he should have voted against the interests of his own district and it proves yet again why he is NOT trustworthy as the Democratic nominee for the United State Senate.

Do not hand me any more bullshit about we need him to vote for Harry Reid for Majority Leader; if he is THAT big a whore, how can you be sure that he will?

Harold Ford (the REAL one) always voted in the best interests of his district, and for his efforts, got indicted and had to fight battles against the establishment the entire 22 years he served us in Congress.

Harold Ford JUNIOR serves no one but himself and his own gain. No, I will not vote for him.

Not now, not ever again.

16 comments:

polar donkey said...

Just remember 39% and low turnout. Junior will be gone and our chance of taking a senate seat.

70s Kid said...

I second the last couple of sentences.

kibitzer said...

Civil question: At what point does the pronoun "our" cease to have any meaning? Who is this "we," for God's sake?

Wintermute said...

This had me LOL. Ludicrous.

Brassmask said...

Speak the truth and shame the devil, Cracker.

And is that the only reason we need Ford? To vote for Harry Reid? I gotta say, I'm not that in a hurry to see Reid running stuff.

PeskyFly said...

Folks, I'd rather fight back in baby steps--- win the house this go-round, Senate the next-- than send a WOLF IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING, A PRETENDER, A FAKE ON THE TAKE, ETC ET AL--- to the Senate. I'm firmly convinced Junior will, eventually, switch parties or become (I) at least. His votes on these kinds of issues suggest as much. So where's the value for the Democrat? Does it profit a man to gain the world and lose his imortal soul?

kibitzer said...

The operating principle of this thing is now quite clear: With the limited exception of a few votes friendly to those remaining Democratic constituencies that help pay his bills (e.g., organized labor), Harold Jr. will vote exclusively and invaryingly (a) the way he thinks the three Republicans in the Senate race would vote (so as not to give any of them an issue against him ); or (b) the way his principal donors (e.g., the credit card industry) prefer him to.

No exceptions. Anything that even looks like an exception will turn out to be merely a case of rwarding another donor.

The only thing that will keep him on the Democratic side at all, if elected to the Senate, is his ambition (whetted by an obedient mediocracy) to become a vice-presidential or presi8dential nominee. But even that motive can be co-opted. Think about it.

Serious question: Whose victory would do more long-term damage to the Democratic Party: Ford's? Corker's? Hilleary's? Bryant's?

GCantStandYa said...

Time to go against the collective wisdom again.

This vote does represent a pattern, but it is not nearly desreving of the contempt being shown.

One of the first lines in Cracker's post is extremely important...IT WOULD HAVE PASSED ANYWAY. Just like the bankruptcy bill that everyone is so hot and bothered by.

Hate the legislation all you want, but recognize that Jr. votes in these cases only matters if it creates or breaks a tie.

You are asking him to create vulnerabilities from the people who are still his opponents (NOT KURITA) for symbolic gestures. Feel good votes. That accomplish nothing.

Now the risk in this tactic is angering his "base". But I would expect his base to understand the tactical decisions behind this. I would expect it would be more important to this oft offended base to have control of the Senate, than to have some symbolic gestures. I have been wrong before.

kibitzer said...

"Yes, I voted for the plebiscite authorizing the invasion of Poland, but IT WOULD HAVE PASSED ANYWAY. Just like the anti-Jewish measures that everyone is so hot and bothered by. "

The Christian Progressive Liberal said...

Can a sista from DC comment here? What Brassmark said - there's no guarantee Ford's gonna remember he's a Democrat; in fact, he goes out of his way to remember he's African-American, so you can expect he'll sling his party affiliation under a bus and become an Independent Rethug.

Now, watch how the trolls flame what I said, when there's eight comments basically saying the same thing. Don't you wonder why I get flamed and you don't? LOL

The Christian Progressive Liberal said...

I should have said "goes out of his way not to remember he's African-American"

GCantStandYa said...

Kibitzer,

Nazi analogies. Goodwin is so proud.

kibitzer said...

Sorry,GCantStandYa, I was just following orders. And besides, somebody would have said it anyway.

dwayneearl said...

Let's talk about historical context. It is very orthodox political strategy to marginalize your opponent by taking the middle ground (often by coopting some of their agenda) and forcing your opponent to run farther left or right than he wants.

Some chosen presidential races from the last 50 years:
1952-56: Eisenhower forces Stevenson to the left
1964: LBJ forces Goldwater far right.
1972: Nixon forces McGovern far left
1980-84: Reagan forces both Carter and Mondale far left
1988: Bush Senior forces Dukakis far left
1992-96: Clinton forces Bush and Dole far right
2004: W. forces Kerry left

How about 1976 where Jim Sasser forced Bill Brock to the extreme right? How about 1994 where Alexander forced Sasser far left? We can go on and on.

Although I don't support Jr.'s ambiguous positions, I can see the longterm goal, i.e., winning. There is an opportunity here to push the Bryants/Corkers/Hillearys somewhere far to the right of mainstream Tennesseeans. Corker and Hilleary are already almost there. It makes sense to me to push them into an "I'm more conservative than you" contest.

Junior's votes in the House have angered many of us (me included). To many of us he appears a shameless opportunist (what politician isn't?). I'd love a candidate that would be worthy of our efforts. Know anybody who could actually win? I really liked Kurita but she had no chance even with no Jr. in the race.

LeftWingCracker said...

I'd like to explore the theme here of "Kurita couldn't win".

Kurita A) represents a conservative, GOP-leaning Senate district, B) has been ENDORSED by the NRA, but C) votes a Democratic line economically. She would not have been hurt by family associations, and she would not have had the baggage of race.

She would have focused the race on economic issues, which is a Democratic winner.

had she been the nominee, how could she NOT have won?

Brassmask said...

Hey, dwayneearl,

Although I don't support Jr.'s ambiguous positions, I can see the longterm goal, i.e., winning.

What's the point? Do you think he will magically start voting for his constituents once he "wins"? Wake up, dude.

If the things were going to pass anyway, why not show his true D colors and vote against it to show that he still has principles?!?!?!

No, he'd rather suck to the right and cast off the people who he is supposed to be representing and vote FOR it. JEZUSS, DUDE.