Molly Ivins is disgusted with DC Dems

Molly Ivins has the right idea.

I have had it with the D.C. Democrats, had it with the DLC Democrats, had it with every calculating, equivocating, triangulating, straddling, hair-splitting son of a bitch up there, and that includes Hillary Rodham Clinton.

I will not be supporting Senator Clinton because: a) she has no clear stand on the war and b) Terri Schiavo and flag-burning are not issues where you reach out to the other side and try to split the difference. You want to talk about lowering abortion rates through cooperation on sex education and contraception, fine, but don't jack with stuff that is pure rightwing firewater.

I canÂ’t see a damn soul in D.C. except Russ Feingold who is even worth considering for President. The rest of them seem to me so poisonously in hock to this system of legalized bribery they canÂ’t even see straight.[Snip]

As usual, the Democrats have forty good issues on their side and want to run on thirty-nine of them. Here are three they should stick to:

1) Iraq is making terrorism worse; itÂ’s a breeding ground. We need to extricate ourselves as soon as possible. We are not helping the Iraqis by staying.

2) Full public financing of campaigns so as to drive the moneylenders from the halls of Washington.

3) Single-payer health insurance.

Every Democrat I talk to is appalled at the sheer gutlessness and spinelessness of the Democratic performance. The party is still cringing at the thought of being called, ooh-ooh, "“unpatriotic"” by a bunch of rightwingers.

Take "“unpatriotic" and shove it. How dare they do this to our country? “"Unpatriotic"? These people have ruined the American military! Not to mention the economy, the middle class, and our reputation in the world. Everything they touch turns to dirt, including Medicare prescription drugs and hurricane relief.

This is not a time for a candidate who will offend no one; it is time for a candidate who takes clear stands and kicks ass.

Molly has this absolutely right. The existing Democratic "leaders" are so damned afraid they will lose their current paychecks they do absolutely nothing for the nation or the Democratic Party.

There is no solution for America in Iraq except to get out while we still have enough of an Army still in existence to rebuild it in a reasonable time. We do nothing to strengthen or make America more secure by staying in Iraq.

Want to solve the problem of Republican political corruption? (shhh! And Democratic political corruption.) We need to get corporations and their slush funds the Hell out of American politics by implementing PUBLIC FINANCING OF ELECTIONS. We need to make taking money from corporations - and unions - then passing legislation for them a crime. We do that simply by making it a crime to take any money from them. They can then make their case just like voters who cannot "Pay For Access."

Democrats need to get solidly behind single payer health insurance. For that case go see Social Security & Medicare Notes.

America also needs to get control of gerrymandering Congressional Districts on a national level so that neither party can build an election advantage into the system that overrides the will of all the voters.

See any of that happening in D.C.? Except for Feingold and his censure motion and Murtha suggesting that we get out of Iraq, I sure don't. But that is what America needs. Now.

---

As an example, this is the Republocrat of the Month from the Intreped Liberal Journal.

Once again I am compelled to name a Senator from my home state of New York as the Republocrat of the Month. Senator Charles Schumer is an intelligent man with a pugnacious style I used to admire. I especially appreciated the way he took down Senator Al D’Amato in 1998. D’Amato was notorious for his rough and tumble campaigns and Schumer demonstrated skill and toughness in defeating him. Schumer was also a steadfast defender of the Constitution during the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton while serving on the House Judiciary Committee and again in the Senate. However, he went along with President Bush too easily after 9/11 and his recent publicity stunts regarding the Dubai Port fiasco can’t conceal that Schumer is part of the problem.

Schumer used his influence as the head of the Democrat’s Senate Campaign Committee to deny Paul Hackett access to financial donors. Undermining a candidate’s ability to raise money in a large state such as Ohio is analogous to wiping him off the ballot. Hence, Schumer withheld the power of choice from Ohio Democrats and that is utterly despicable.

Washington Democrats such as Schumer who survived the party’s debacle in 1994 have a perverse pathology. They played triangulation games with President Clinton to preserve their position in the '90s and then took the path of least resistance under President Bush. As a result, these Washington Democrats that Schumer epitomizes have become a self-gelding machine of ineptitude with no core. Survival has not resulted in wisdom for this group of Democrats. Instead, navigating through turbulent political waters has imbued Democrats such as Schumer with an off-putting combination of timidity and hubris. Both qualities were on display in his behind the scenes party machine intervention in Ohio. Timidity because these Democrats fear an independent outsider like Hackett they can’t control. Hubris because of a chronic belief their judgment is superior to that of voters. Remember, the party leadership wasn’t enamored of candidate Barack Obama two years ago either.

[Bolding is mine - RB]