Replies to post #107557 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[StephanieVanbryce]

I agree .. it is the lack of decency/morals in the media that this ugly guy has his picture and name anywhere .. it's what they have been doing for a long time now .. if you are crazy .. come to my tv program I will give you your 15 mins. of fame .. then you will get to go on all the other tv stations AND you will be on the front page of every newspaper in the country.

I wonder if they did that for the KKK?

......here's where I got the info on Rahm wanting to be mayor he said so . .. ;)..here's some snips

"I would like to run for the mayor of the city of Chicago," Emanuel told talk show host Charlie Rose in April. "That has always been an aspiration of mine even when I was in the House of Representatives."

Conversations with plugged-in Chicago Democrats -- and boy are there lots of them! -- make clear that if Emanuel ran, he would be the clear frontrunner although almost certainly wouldn't have the field entirely to himself.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/white-house/chicago-mayor-richard-m-daley.html

As far as DG goes .. I always thought he was a republican .. one of those kind that are not around any more .. you know .. the kind that are sane. I thought he worked for reagan and other republicans .. maybe he isn't .. all though I just can't see working for reagan .. wait a minute . ....I think he worked for nixon ... ? anyway.... I have read everywhere that he is always talking about how Obama needs to MOVE to the RIGHT .. etc.. etc.... I don't watch daytime teevee either .. it's just stuff I've read ...

[StephanieVanbryce]

The coming war among Dems

here's the one about Obama hiring a republican, o.k. I see that Greg updated this post since I read it the other day
.. so maybe this was more conjecture from him that anything else ..we will see

By Greg Sargent | September 8, 2010; 2:18 PM ET

It's coming.

There's been a lot of consternation on the Internets about the possibility that the White House may pick a Republican to succeed Rahm Emanuel as chief of staff, as a good-faith bipartisan gesture towards the GOP. It's an interesting discussion, as far as it goes.

But all the chatter over Rahm's replacement really reflects something far larger than speculation over White House personnel. It's the first hint of what's to come after the Dems' expected November bloodbath: An intra-party war among Dems over the real significance of the results, and over how Dems should recalibrate in response. And that battle isn't going to be pretty.

The specter of a Republican replacing Rahm, which is unlikely but not impossible, opens a window on broader liberal concerns: The idea that some Beltway Dems are already primed to interpret Dem losses through a standard Beltway prism. The Dem shellacking simply must mean that Obama overread his mandate and undertook an agenda that was too partisan, too ambitious, and -- worst of all -- too liberal. His only hope of salvation is to tearfully confess to liberal overreach, go through a big public staff shakeup, dramatically scale back his ambitions, and engage in some genuine bipartisanship -- all for the Beltway media's consumption.

There's no doubt that the White House wil be forced to recalibrate, particularly if the GOP retakes Congress. But I really hope that Dems in positions of power will not succumb entirely to this pre-ordained Beltway interpretation. I'm not optimistic, though. As Josh Marshall put it, after the elections, Dems are going to face a "deafening chorus of defeatism and ideological self-doubt" that they will have a very difficult time resisting.

Atrios, for his part, put it another way, suggesting that whatever happens on election day, it will inevitably prove that America is "now and forever, a center right country."

I'd only add that some Beltway Dems are already making this case.

Clinton pollster Doug Schoen, who got lots of attention warning Dems that passing health reform would mean certain catastrophe, is already out front suggesting that unless Obama pulls a Clinton, he won't be reelected. Meanwhile, some Republicans, such as Mitch McConnell, are already telling Obama that his only hope is to govern next year from the "center right."

There is going to be a very big fight over this, so let's marshall the counter arguments. Dem losses this fall will be largely due to the economy and unemployment, which would have been far worse today without the stimulus. What's more, Obama didn't govern from the far left: Health care reform and even Wall Street reform were arguably moderate solutions to serious crises that demanded urgent attention. And regardless of the politics, Dems campaigned on a promise to do these things -- and they were substantively the right things to do.

Over time, there's a good chance the public will agree, and come to see these things as achievements. In the long run, Dems will benefit from doing all this very difficult heavy lifting -- even if it costs them in the short term. Capitulating to the argument that Dems overreached only risks undermining all this hard work and the political benefits it will ultimately bring. And Dems would be grossly irresponsible if they didn't at least try to continue tackling the big challenges that remain, such as climate change.

The demand that Dems beat their breasts and admit to liberal overreach -- and that they immediately scamper to the "center," whatever that means -- are only going to get louder. And many of those demands will be coming from the usual suspects within the Democratic Party. So it's a good idea to be prepared for what's coming.

UPDATE, 2:45 p.m.: As Barbara Morrill points out, some Dems are already predicting that Dem losses will force them to embrace bipartisan cooperation to make angry voters happy.

UPDATE, 6:03 p.m.: In retrospect, I think I overstated the possibility that Rahm could be replaced by a Republican. While I think this is possible, it's definitely unlikely. I was just using that as a jumping off point to the larger discussion here. I've edited the above to clarify.

Embedded links
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/the_coming_war_among_dems.html#more