Woolsey Calls For Primaries Against Dems

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/09/woolsey_calls_for_primaries_against_dems.php

Woolsey Calls For Primaries Against Dems
By Eric Kleefeld - September 12, 2007, 9:07AM

It turns out that anti-war activists who want to take on the Democrats have an ally within the House Democrats themselves: Representative Lynn Woolsey of California.

The Hill reports that Woolsey approved of a suggestion that activists challenge incumbent Democrats in the primaries. "You folks should go after the Democrats," she said on a conference call last month, organized by the Network of Spiritual Progressives.

"I’d hate to lose the majority, but I’m telling you, if we don’t stand up to our responsibility, maybe that’s the lesson to be learned," Woolsey said.

At least until there is a viable alternative.

Responsibility is a bitch, but it must be accepted. Voting for someone simply because they aren't a Republican is not going to cut it any more. As Debs said, "I would rather vote for something I want and not get it, than vote for something I don't want and get it."

Anti-war candidates should run as Democrats. If they represent the opinions and values of the majority of Democratic voters, they will win the primary. If they represent the opinins and values of the majority of voters, they will win the election as Democrats. That is the way democracy works.

Does Rep. Woolsey really mean to imply that anti-war candidates will automatically lose to Republicks?

(who are useless) and run on an anti-war platform, which is the way to go and would have popular support.

support ending the war for some reason - what do you think that reason is? If the Democratic Party thought that it would be a 'winner' to actively oppose the war, don't you think that they would? So the fact that they are not doing so must mean that they think it would be a 'loser', right?

The attitude you describe is exactly why so many Americans do not bother to vote any more. On many issues such as the war in Iraq, there is no meaningful difference.

The corporations own too much of the Democratic Party and control way too much of its actions. The American people and the Iraqi people are on their own...

I'd hate to lose the majority, too, but what good is the majority if we just vote to fill our Party with New Democrat Neo-Con DINOs ?????????

No thanks. I'm with Woolsey on this. she is a Hero!


TC

on the Tom Hartman show last night said the best hope was to have groups of a couple thousand activists pressuring watchdogging their Congressmen(whatever their party or financial proclivity) constantly. Running opposition is a single act with punch but "he who cannot be mentioned" has a point for continuity and what is necessary- forever- if we are to have real democracy, probably one better than we ever had. Voting is not enough.

As for accepting the possibility of losing the majority that is the wrong viewpoint. It is not just one issue and putting up a loser to challenge and under-performer. it is getting someone to better represent the district and the wishes and needs of the majority. There is ALWAYS someone better. It is a question of getting someone who will throw themselves into the work and what support they get in depth and in competence to match. And who will do the getting if no one spontaneously jumps in out of nowhere? it would be better then, strangely, to have a coalition of bipartisan district activists intent on competent and passionate populist leadership that represents the people. The very process of gathering that srtom would daunt the comfortable incumbents more than the local chapter of MoveOn running a noble gesture.

rhymes with .. ?

Its the only way. We've done everything else we can do.

If you want far right policies- then vote for a person who supports those.

The D or the R behind the name is just a formality.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

But I won't be challenging her...she rocks!!!!

:applause:

... like the Iraq war, the corporatization of so much that affects the average person in many ways whether they are conservative or liberal, etc.

In short, focus on getting rid of these "blue dog" Democrats by attacking the nerve center of their connections to the corruption campaign money, not focus so much on divisive social issues, etc. Put forth intelligent and populist views on the war to fight war profiteering, on immigration to fight the corporate influence on that issue and less on xenophobic stances, public campaign financing, etc.

Some of us progressives might have very strong feelings on issues such as abortion, gay marriage, etc., but perhaps take care not to emphasize those so much that we lose those on the other side that might otherwise join us in getting rid of these "Corporate Democrats". I think we need to get rid of the corporate influence, and not get too distracted by other issues. I think this will help us get back a TRUE majority that will work together as a block to restore the will of the people in our government. EMPHASIZE rule of the people.

And find ways to reach people that bypass the mainstream media, since they will be NO help in helping us stay focused on these issues, as doing so will hit the heart of what THEY want to control in government too.

But I think it is a potential unifying theme that can get really thinking moderates together with us in throwing out these "blue dogs". Expose how these folks aren't really MODERATE, but corporate serving and are trying to hijack the "moderate" label falsely to divide us.

On the other "non-corporate" issues, when pressed on stances on them, I'd say that we have our own personal feelings, but that we want to listen to the feelings and opinions of all of the constituents in a given area, and weigh them when trying to put forth stances on relevant legislation in congress in real grass roots "democratic style" where we hear the voices of everyone to help us in our decision process.

The DCCC under Rham (Big Money) Emmanuel has been interfering with Democratic Primaries and using Democratic Money to target Progressive Grassroots candidates.

I witnessed this in Minnesota. The DCCC actually contacted donors to the grassroots Progressive and threatened them with economic retaliation if they continued to support a candidate not approved by Rham. They were then asked to match their contribution with one to Rham's candidate who had the Corporate seal of approval.


Please read this thread from the Minnesota Forum, Sept. 2005.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=160&topic_id=14207

If you Work for a Living, do NOT send donations to the DCCC. Rham Emmanuel will use this money AGAINST your interests.

Kudos to Lynn Woolsey for having the courage to point out that there are traitors INSIDE the Democratic Party. It is time to start naming NAMES.
Paul Wellstone was starting to call out the traitor Democrats shortly before he was killed.
Lynn, please stay out of small planes.

K&R
:patriot:

"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

The Democrat willing to hold his/her own party accountable,

or the Democrat willing to excuse any atrocity, any corruption, for the sake of party loyalty?