Opponion Forum Index
RegisterSearchMemberlistLog in
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
"Progressives" Would Rather Stay In Wilderness
Who are the bigger idiots?

The far left and the far right 100% 100% ( 1 )
the far right and the far left 0% 0% ( 0 )

Total Votes : 1
Author Message
Reply with quote
Post "Progressives" Would Rather Stay In Wilderness 

"Progressives" Would Rather Stay In The Wilderness Than Allow The DLC To Lead Them To The Promised Land Again

I sure hate to offend the precious sensibilities of you "progressives" and "conservatives" but you're all clueless. Being more concerned with ideological purity then progress, you partisan hacks are ruining the country.

Today, I'm going to pick on the leftwingers. The "prooogressssives." But don't feel left out if you're a Republican (i.e., a fake conservative. You're day is coming - especially if I hang around here long.)

When (if) the Democrats win the House of Representatives this fall, one man will largely be credited for it - DCCC chair and Congressman Rahm Emanuel. If you don't know who Enanuel is, he is one of those animals the left and right hate. They'd probably team up and jump him in dark alley if they had the balls to do it.

The Executive Director of the Democratic Party pac I'm the vice chair of knows Rahm Emmanual. She calls him a "mean son of a bitch."

Nina Easton at CNN calls him a "pittbull" and relays an interesting exchange he recently had with President Bush. Wikipedia's entry on Emanuel says he is noted for his strong partisan style and his fundraising prowess.

Rollingstone called him the "political brains of Bill Clinton's White House" and tells how he is known for sending dead fish to his political enemies. Don't go thinking he isn't all that. He'd have you for lunch.

Not only does he have the Democratic party poised to take control of the House, he also has the far left in a minor rage because they can't stand the prospect of a DLC member once again leading the party to the promised land.

Led by the often factually challenged David Sirota, the far left's tizzy over Emanuel this week concerns something they think Emanuel said, but in fact, did not. Sirota says in a piece this week:

Sadly, if you read Newsweek this week, you'll see... in a giant piece, the magazine transcribes Rep. Rahm Emanuel's diarrhea of the mouth, where he gushes about how great he's been at leveraging the prospect of him as a chief lawmaker on a powerful committee to rake in cash from special interests.

The only problem with that, Mr. Sirota, is that Emanuel didn't actually say that. Drawing from an excellent smack down at Political Cortex from Pontificator, let's take a peak at the actual passage from the Newsweek article:

As a member of the Ways and Means Committee, Emanuel teamed with Senate campaign chair Chuck Schumer to tap uncharted donor fields in the financial industry. "We're working outside of traditional banks,' he says proudly, 'into the private-equity world, the hedge-fund world, the distressed-debt world." These 'worlds' know they are talking to a guy who not only runs the campaign committee, but who could be in the majority of the key financial committee--and maybe even majority leader.

From this passage, Sirota draws the conclusion that Emmanual is:

gushing about how great he's been at leveraging the prospect of him as a chief lawmaker on a powerful committee to rake in cash from special interests.

And that Emmanual is:

bragging to reporters about Democratic Party corruption

However, if you read the passage again, you'll see that all Emmanual actually says is the following:

"We're working outside of traditional banks,' he says proudly, 'into the private-equity world, the hedge-fund world, the distressed-debt world."

Pontificator continues, "That's it. The additional language about Emanual being on key financial committess comes entirely from the Newsweek reporter, who, in typical MSM media fashion, is offering his negative take on Emmanual's comment, and is trying to imply, without any evidence whatsoever, that Emanuel is engaged in some kind of implicit shakedown.

Rahm is doing exactly what we want a Democratic House leader to do. He is reaching out to people of means in a relatively new industry -- hedge funds and private equity funds -- and soliciting donations. Many of these people are highly progressive and hostile to the Iraq war and the Bush administration's incompetant reign of error. To bash Rahm because a MSM media twerp wants to put a negative spin on Emanual's comment, and to accuse him of bragging about bribing these people -- when such an accusation is patently false -- is not only morally wrong but also extremely counterproductive, considering we're within 60 days of the election.

... Sirota, who failed to even link to the correct Newsweek article, should be a little more careful next time before shooting from the hip at elected Democrats."

But we all know Sirota has made a career out of trashing elected Democrats so why should the above text surprise you? And when given this information, the left lurches into some sort of "anti-corporation" tirade. See, Emanuel is a part of the DLC, and the left are a little scared right now that he will (deservedly) get the credit when the Democrats win the House back in November. Here's an exact quote from a so-called "progressive" on Emanuel:

He's done most of his fundraising through from corporations, corporate lobbyists and GOP donors. He has a long record of placing the needs of corporations over middle class Americans and rank and file Dems.

All this is, of course, spoken without a single shred of evidence to support the assertions. Here is a similar and equally comical "progressive" comment on the DLC:

The DLC is a bunch of corporate whores who are more special-interest LOBBY group than part of this Party. They are a bunch of DINO Bush-enablers whose wussy modus operendi has been to make us look like a bunch of gutless wonder flip-flopper war-monger corporatists.

But for all of their "truthiness" and "viva la revolution" rhetoric, Emanuel is already recieving credit from Congressional Democrats for getting us even this close to winning the House in November. My question to the "progressives" is would they rather the Democrats LOSE than be led by Emanuel into victory?

(Of course I'm a centrist. Visit my blog: http://www.donkeydigest.com)

Reply with quote

Wow, what a bitter tirade with virtually no substance whatsoever. While you managed to constantly attempt to insult progressives (and conservatives), you did nothing at all to prove your point. In fact, you completely ignore the fact that the potential Democratic gains this election have almost nothing to do with Rahm Emanuel and everything to do with George W. Bush's failed policies and, to a lesser extent, the Mark Foley scandal. One could just as easily make the claim that Howard Dean was responsible for the Democrats reversal of fortunes, but as I said, it has little to do with what the Democrats have done.

Your claim that the various factions of the left are 'led' by some irrelevant blogger that I had never even heard of (David Sirota) borders on absurdity. In fact, it seems like this whole post was just a random attack on this blogger, in which you try to associate all progressives with him.

Display posts from previous:
Reply to topic Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum