"Progressive caucus," my ass Archives

February 2, 2007

Here's your weapon; now shoot yourself in the foot

Maybe lawyering has its uses:

Offensive military action against Iran would be illegal under the United Nations Charter, which requires that members settle international disputes by peaceful means. The UN Charter is a treaty ratified by the US and thus part of American law under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. Under the Charter, a country can attack another only in self-defense or with the blessing of the Security Council....

Congress should immediately pass a binding resolution reaffirming the United States' legal obligations and informing the Bush administration that it will not concur in any invasion or military action against Iran, would refuse to approve any funding for it, and would consider actions taken in contravention of the resolution as impeachable offenses.

So, prog caucus -- get busy.

You! Out of the tent!

Today's poser: "so what's the harm in a big-tent jackass party?"

Answer: big-tenting is exactly what puts the evil in lesser evil. It's plain as Hillary's breakfast face that until all we left-votin' legionnaires shout "fuck the big tent or we fuck you" the so-called "progressive" caucus' bluff can't be called.

Now, when we scream at 'em "you measly back-street pimps, you're supping with Senator Gill-Man himself, the creature from the Bridgeport lagoon!" they reply -- with a calm and studied sanctimony -- "But folks! Our party is a big-tent party, 'cause big-tent parties are winning parties, and winning parties are... well... they win, you see. Don't you?"

Bullshit. You can't hide back there anymore, Barney and company. We want you jumping off that garbage scow, now! That's right, split, you bastards, split -- bust the donks back to also-ran status.

Recall Lyndon's line -- "Better we keep those fuckers on the inside pissin' out...."? Well, you dickweeds need to be "on the outside, pissin' in."

March 23, 2007

Profiles in cowardice

From the Comment Seems Superfluous department:

Liberals Relent on Iraq War Funding

Liberal opposition to a $124 billion war spending bill broke last night, when leaders of the antiwar Out of Iraq Caucus pledged to Democratic leaders that they will not block the measure....

House liberals have been the main obstacle to leadership efforts to put a timeline on the withdrawal of U.S. forces. They have complained that the proposal would not bring troops home fast enough. Their opposition has riven the antiwar movement, split the Democratic base and been the main stumbling block to the legislation....

As debate began on the bill yesterday, members of the antiwar caucus and party leaders held a backroom meeting in which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) made a final plea to the group, asking it to deliver at least four votes when the roll is called. The members promised 10.

"I find myself in the excruciating position of being asked to choose between voting for funding for the war or establishing timelines to end it," said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.). "I have struggled with this decision, but I finally decided that, while I cannot betray my conscience, I cannot stand in the way of passing a measure that puts a concrete end date on this unnecessary war."

.... Shortly after, Out of Iraq Caucus leaders decided to break the pact that members had made to stick together against the bill. "We have released people who have been pained by all this," said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.). "We told them we don't want them to be in a position of undermining Nancy's speakership."

What was that line from the Vietnam period -- we had to destroy the village to save it? The pwoggies had to prolong the war to end it.

Oh, I'm so glad we have a Democratic majority in the House. It's made such a difference, hasn't it?

October 23, 2009

Beautiful Losing

Speaker Nancy Pelosi counted votes Thursday night and determined she could not pass a “robust public option” — the most aggressive of the three forms of a public option House Democrats have been considering as part of a national overhaul of health care.

Pelosi's decision—coupled with a significant turn of events yesterday during a private White House meeting—points to an increasingly likely compromise for a “trigger” option for a government plan.


Rank and file membership in the Democratic Party is very much like incarceration in a giant Skinner Box; one with no rewards for the test subjects. The "trigger" option is designed to get the poor things to run on the random electric shock treadmill again. I think they'd do it without the gratuitous, bad faith hope inducement, but that's included anyway. Maybe the Democratic Party grandees are bored, and get an extra little thrill from the empty spitefulness. Or, maybe, they simply don't know any better, having grown used to the same in their own elite Skinner Box environments. It really doesn't matter, however. The motivation for it, insofar as these empty suits are capable of motivation, is irrelevant. The beautiful losing is the same old schtick.

About "Progressive caucus," my ass

This page contains an archive of all entries posted to Stop Me Before I Vote Again in the "Progressive caucus," my ass category. They are listed from oldest to newest.

'94 all over again? is the next category.

Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Powered by
Movable Type 3.31