You can almost "hear" the whine in this persons journal.
The latest message was sent to Congressman Pete Stark of California by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Stark dared to express views on the House floor that made some on the right angry. So his remarks were condemned by Pelosi in public. Needless to say the folks over at Hot Air are drooling over her putdown. They figure they won another round.
[...]
Guess that will teach Stark to show too much emotion.
Remember when Dick Durbin actually showed some emotion and made comments that the right wing did not like? Well, he sure did end up apologizing also, didn't he? Not really an activist, but he really learned not to speak unpleasantly.
[...]
Not long ago they took a vote to condemn MoveOn for an ad. The vote to condemn got more votes than the SCHIP.
[...]
On September 27 one of the most blatant put downs of the grassroots, netroots, liberals, activists was put front and center on the DLC website. The article, which is linked to the full David Brooks op ed was even more insulting to us because the DLC only published parts of it....those geared to put grassroots, netroots, liberals, activists in their places.
The Center Holds
by David BrooksIn the beginning of August, liberal bloggers met at the YearlyKos convention while centrist Democrats met at the Democratic Leadership Council's National Conversation. Almost every Democratic presidential candidate attended YearlyKos, and none visited the D.L.C.
At the time, that seemed a sign that the left was gaining the upper hand in its perpetual struggle with the center over the soul of the Democratic Party. But now it's clear that was only cosmetic.
Ouch, that hurt.Now it's evident that if you want to understand the future of the Democratic Party you can learn almost nothing from the bloggers, billionaires and activists on the left who make up the "netroots. You can learn most of what you need to know by paying attention to two different groups -- high school educated women in the Midwest, and the old Clinton establishment in Washington.
Yes, that is who is in charge. David Brooks is right about who controls the message in DC...."The fact is, many Democratic politicians privately detest the netroots' self-righteousness and bullying. They also know their party has a historic opportunity to pick up disaffected Republicans and moderates, so long as they don't blow it by drifting into cuckoo land. They also know that a Democratic president is going to face challenges from Iran and elsewhere that are going to require hard-line, hawkish responses.
Ouch, again.
This MadFloridian forgot to mention David Obey and his famous outburst about "Idiot Liberals"... so to be helpful here, I will remind them what Obey had to say, on video no less:
TRANSCRIPT:
Tina Richards, identified as a military mom: (Introducing herself to Obey). Tina Richards. I had left a poem that my son had written (unintelligible) and I was wondering if it had ever gotten to you. He's a United States Marine. He's done two tours in Iraq. And he's ready to be deployed for a third tour.
OBEY: I honestly don't know...
[Richards discusses son's suicide attempts and problems with the VA.]
Richards: Are you going to be voting against the supplemental?
OBEY: Absolutely not. I'm the sponsor of the supplemental.
Richards: For the, um, to continue to the war?
OBEY: (Getting agitated). It doesn't--we're trying to--the President wants to continue the war. We're trying to use the supplemental to end the war. But you can't end the war if you vote against the supplemental. It's time these idiot liberals understand that. There's a hell of a difference between de-funding the troops and ending the war. I'm not gonna deny body armor. I'm not gonna deny funding for veterans' hospitals and for defense hospitals so you can help people who have medical problems. And that's what you do if you vote against that bill.
Richards: But there should be enough money in the regular defense bill...
OBEY: Well, there isn't...
Richards: ...without continuing the funding for the war.
OBEY: There isn't. There isn't. That's not the way it works. The money in the defense bill -- it pays for a standing army. But it doesn't pay for these recurrent costs. We're going to add over a billion dollars more to it than what the President was asking for in that bill so we can deal with some of exactly the problems here you're talking about. How the hell are you going to provide money to the hospitals if you don't provide the money?
Richards: Well, then, are you going to be in support then of--
OBEY: I HATE THE WAR! I voted against it to start with. I was the first guy in Congress to call for Rumsfeld's resignation. But we don't have the votes to de-fund the war. And we shouldn't. Because that also means de-funding everything that you've got in that bill to help the guys who are victims of the war.
Richards: Well, there's an amendment to the supplemental that's being proposed to fully fund the withdrawal of the troops [Ed.: The Lee Amendment] --
OBEY: THAT MAKES NO SENSE! It doesn't work that way.
Richards: Well, so that the funds--
OBEY: (Gesturing with arms wildly) The language we have in the resolution ends the authority for the war. Makes it illegal to proceed with the war. You don't have to de-fund something if the war doesn't exist!
Richards: Oh, I didn't know that was in the--
OBEY: That's the problem! That's the problem! The liberal groups are jumping around without knowing what the hell is in the bill! You don't have to cut off funds for an activity that is no longer legal. We're shutting it off.
I am going to interrupt here to make a point I have made before. Liberals and those to the far far left are so busy spouting out talking points that they hear from other far left idiots that they do not bother to learn for themselves whether what they are saying is true or even possible.
They seem to think if you want something you should be able to get it...they do not understand that wishing for something doesn't make it possible to get.
Second man in hallway interrupts: Congressman, what about the Church Amendment that helped end the Vietnam War in, what was is, '72-'73.
OBEY: It took us 31 different efforts to get there. I was here for that!
Man: Didn't that help end the ground war in Vietnam?
OBEY: No, it didn't. The political pressure on the administration finally ended the war. The amendment that finally ended the funding was the [unintelligible] amendment. I was the sponsor of that--
Man: But if you pass a resolution, isn't he still the commander-in-chief?
OBEY: (Gesturing wildly again) WE DON'T HAVE THE VOTES TO PASS IT! WE COULDN'T EVEN GET THE VOTES TO PASS A NON-BINDING RESOLUTION ONE WEEK AGO! How the hell do you think we're gonna get the votes to cut off the war?!
Man: You stop the funding.
OBEY: (Shouting) HOW IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE VOTES?! It takes...
Man: Filibuster his supplemental request.
OBEY: There is no filibuster in the House!
Man: Well, in the Senate they could do it.
OBEY: I'm sorry...No, I'm not gonna vote for it [Lee amendment].
(Pointing finger) I’m the sponsor of the bill that’s going to be on floor. And that bill ends the war. IF THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU, YOU'RE SMOKING SOMETHING ILLEGAL!
Man: No, I'm not, sir.
OBEY: You’ve got your facts screwed up!
Man: (Crosstalk)
OBEY: We can’t get the votes! You see a magic wand in my pocket? How the hell we going to get the votes for it? We ain’t got the votes for it. We do have the votes if you guys quit screwing it up. We do have the votes to end the legal authority for the war. That's the same as de-funding it--YES IT WOULD!
Walks away. Slams office door.
Just for kicks, here is the video again of David Obey saying it.
That video always makes me laugh. It is not often that a Democratic politician actually says what they are thinking about the "idiot liberals" of their party.
Even more rare that it gets caught on video for prosperity...LOL
.