I can't find where ANY republicans have been receptive to calls for 'unity' from Clinton & Obama

I don't give a damn about unifying or working with the republican opposition. And, I'm left wondering just WHO these republican politicians ARE they envision 'working together' with for 'change' on issues and legislation which republicans have, so far, been unified in OBSTRUCTING. Hasn't the present Democratic leadership done all they could to 'reach out' to republicans and have been rejected and ignored?

What we need is for voters to elect more Democrats so that our party will be able to better dictate priorities and action in Congress. I don't see the point in telling voters that our nominee is going to come in to office and bend to the obstructionists. That's not leadership, it's wishy-washy, unprincipled surrender to those in the opposition party who have been blocking reforms and accountability for their political gain, at our expense.

This notion of 'unity' with the republican opposition -- whose members have evolved into nothing but shills for their corporate and fundamentalist Christian benefactors -- is a fantasy at best; and an outright sham, if it's applied in any way to the republican party which opposes us today. It's a nauseating appeal and a shameful retreat from the BATTLES all of us have been waging against the thievery from the entrenched republican, corporatist class which has taken over our government -- ushered in by the Bush administration and enabled by their relentless assaults on our democracy.

If there is to be any real change in the way Washington does our nation's business, it will have to come from the efforts of legislators who are willing to turn their backs on the entrenched interests and put the interests of the voters at the top of their agenda. There shouldn't be a rush to elevate the agenda of the opposition to some kind of parity with our own party's proposals or platform by giving their politically constructed obstruction the credence of a legitimate position for debate.

The elevation of our Democratic candidate to the White House should be a resounding rejection of the corporatism which has infected our government in the last decade. We shouldn't be 'reaching out' to ANY of those industry interests privileged by this generation of republicans. We have no responsibility to give a moment's priority to the defense industry warmongers, the pharmaceutical industry obstructionists, the insurance industry shills, the oil industry executives . . .

Our elected Democrats' most important and enduring obligation is to those individual Americans who vote to enable them into office. Those are the people I want to see our president reaching-out to. Those are the people I want our president to unify with. I don't give a damn about unifying with the republican opposition.


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/bigtree

So other than a half-way house when they've paid their debts to society, there isn't much Reaching Out can do for either party.

He's going to reach out to them, make nice with them. I doubt there'll even be any investigations, cuz that would piss 'em off.

I'm 61 and I CAN REMEMBER when both parties could work together and compromise on certain issues, but ever since Reagan Republicans have taken a scorched earth policy with the Democrats. At this point I agree that we should try to build as big a majority in both houses to pass any and all progressive legislation and the hell with the Republicans. Only from a position of strength can you "compromise" effectively. Oh, and the way I feel about Republicans nowadays is FUCK 'EM!!!!!!

Here's what Obama said in December: http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/12/edwards-to-obam.html

Some in the race think "I'm not angry or confrontational enough" to change the culture of Washington. "Well, let me tell you something, Iowa. I don't need any lectures on how to bring about change ... I've fought for change all my life ... (Change) won’t just come from more anger at Washington or turning up the heat on Republicans. There’s no shortage of anger and bluster and bitter partisanship out there. We don’t need more heat. We need more light."

Edwards shortly afterward released this paragraph from a speech he is giving tomorrow in Dubuque: "Why on earth would we expect the corporate powers and their lobbyists -– who make billions by selling out the middle-class –- to just give up just because we ask nicely? Nobody who takes their money and defends the broken system is going to bring change. And, unfortunately, nobody who thinks we can just sit down and talk them into compromise is going to bring change either. Compromise and conciliation is the academic theory of change. It just doesn’t work in the real world. Fighting for conviction is the historic reality of change."

We need to gain as many seats in both houses and take back the White house then and only then we can change America for the better so lets show how stupid the g.o.p. is.

All that means to them is that they get the advantage to kick Democrats asses.

They don't want to govern. They're not interested in the betterment of citizens of this country or others in the world. They only want power and money. That's it! So they get it by taking care of their friends who will then take care of them. Taking your tax money and diverting it to their friends.

That's it! Their mantra is not only "Greed is good!" It is also, "Greed is not the most important thing, it's the only thing".

They want us to sit down, shut up, and if at all possible, cease to exist.

Haven't Democrats figured this out yet? Have these "unity" Democrats listened to AM radio at any time in the last 20 years? ANY station, ANY time, ALL day EVERY day - the message is the same. "We hate Democrats, we think Democrats are completely useless, and we are going to crap all over Democrats every chance we get."

You can't work with these people. They aren't interested in that. They are interested in wiping out everything we stand for.

Was it O'Lielly? They cannot stand opposition. They want it shut down, they don't want to have to deal with it, and that's why they want authoritarian powers.

Although shouting "just shut up" at opponents is by no means limited to him. Lost of the Republican hosts do it. They aren't interested in what we have to say. They are interested in bullying us into silence and never hearing from us again.

Translating belief into action; the call of the time that Obama is making has been repeatedly chopped into petty and snide parsed snippets on this board. He is not challenging the political establishment to reconciliation, he is challenging the people (all citizens) to take up common cause in revitalizing the nation and reclaiming our Constitution. He knows the political machineries (Democrat and Republican) are too firmly entrenched in their scripts to change without being deconstructed. It is up to us to change and to own our government and to insist that the needs of the people are more important than those of the machine. Politicians may wish to join, and if they can't participate they should be sent packing.


Now as for republicans responding or working with Democrats, I don't expect those who are part of the machinery to do so. What I have seen here in Iowa is that ordinary citizens responded. My friends and neighbors who firmly voted R in the past caucused with the Democrats this time. I'm not cynical about their reasons because we've sat in each other's living rooms or met on the streets to talk about the issues facing our nation for years now. They have been unhappy. They too are puzzled as to why * was not impeached. Those who tend to cling to the R machinery are the evangelicals and the big money people.

Think broader than the parochial interests of any one party. Obama is building a grassroots movement. We are seeing now who will be truly willing to participate in a meaningful change and we are also seeing who will serve the machine. Right now, our local Democratic Central Committee is deconstructing and is being filled by new people for the first time in many years. I am one of them. I will be the change I want. I understand Obama's call.

But, these candidates are using their posture of unifiers as a retort to those who cast the election as a fight against the entrenched interests.


here's Obama in August: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-6876166,00.html

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama often says he will be a candidate that will bring both parties together and Saturday he named a few of the Republicans he would reach out to if elected.

``There are some very capable Republicans who I have a great deal of respect for,'' Obama said in an interview with The Associated Press. ``The opportunities are there to create a more effective relationship between parties.''

Among the Republicans he would seek help from are Sens. Richard Lugar of Indiana, John Warner of Virginia and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Obama said.

``On foreign policy I've worked very closely with Dick Lugar,'' Obama said. ``I consider him one of my best friends in the Senate. He's someone I would actively seek counsel and advice from when it came to foreign policy.''

``Senator Warner is another example of somebody with great wisdom, although I don't always agree with him on every issue,'' Obama said. ``I would also seek out people like Tom Coburn, who is probably the most conservative member of the U.S. Senate. He has become a friend of mine.''

Part of Washington's problem is that President Bush has created a partisan atmosphere, he said.



here's Clinton in the debate:

"I don't think you make change by, you know, calling for it or by demanding it. I think it is a result of very hard work, bringing people together, stating clearly what your goals are, what your principles are, and then achieving them."


here's her husband this weekend: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/hillaryclinton/story/0,,2236207,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

"The real claim that I think Hillary has to your support is this," he told an audience in Bow. "She has proven that she can achieve results even in a highly contentious environment." If his wife is elected president, Bill Clinton said, she will make it a priority to work with Republicans to get the main planks in her platform - healthcare reform, education legislation and climate change reform - through the US senate, where minorities have the power to block bills. "She is the only one with a consistent record of being able to produce results across party lines, so she can get this done."

Clinton painted a picture of his wife as an emollient political dealmaker that few grass roots Republicans, especially conservatives, would recognise. He said she was a "good friend" of senator John McCain and had good relations with the Republican Iowa victor Mike Huckabee - like Bill Clinton a former governor of Arkansas. She had even worked on adoption law reform with one of Bill Clinton's most implacable foes, the former Republican congressman Tom DeLay of Texas. Bill Clinton said his wife had said, "Bill, I will work with the devil himself to get these kids permanent homes - and she did," he added to laughter.

politicians may join and if they don't, they will be discarded. Perhaps a few will join. Note that Delay and some others like him already have been discarded already.

Tom Coburn as batshit crazy and right wing as he is, co-sponsored the bill with Obama that would create accountability for pork spending. Should Obama not have told Coburn to go fuck himself and not let him co-sponsor? I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have helped the legislation move along.

And don't forget he stabbed Jim Webb in the back on the admendment requiring rest for troops in between deployments.

He won't be around to "cooperate".

It doesn't have to mean caving to pig-ignorant Goopers once he's elected.

I look at it, cynically, as a successful campaign shtick, and if it works more power to the man.

Might have to steal that.

:rofl:

.... yep, that would be about right.

I'm trying to see this as a glass-half-full situation. He's not the best but at least he's not HRC.

:rofl:

a US Senator, to boot, can be so naive as to believe that a political party, which has repeatedly and resolutely rejected subpoenas, indeed, the very rule of law, with arrant contempt, would be amenable to his kindly overtures, sometimes even amenable to gentle peruasion. Get real Obama!

Voters love to hear rhetoric about how partisan gridlock is slowing things down from Washington. But once you're in office, they just care about whether or not you get things done.

When Clinton and Obama talk about working with the other side, that's not really a promise that they have to keep. But promising to work with the other side may get more people to punch a straight Democratic ticket which will help us get our agenda passed.

It's the parties and their elected leaders who are at odds. Even if their calls for unity are just a cynical trick to draw votes from republicans, I doubt many folks are looking for some 'unity' government. They want republicans out of the way of their, would-be, Democratic reformers. Promising or insinuating that republicans are going to 'work with' Democrats is a fantasy, as Edwards echoed today.

That's a reference to politicians, not voters. He's an idiot if thinks that'll work, and a liar if it's just a politically campaign ruse. Either way, I don't want him to be president.

The Repukes will work to have Dems marginalized -- holding meetings in the basement of the Capitol building. Also, a nasty infestation of neocons comes with that.

No, the Repukes must be marginalized and swept out at every turn. Work to remove them -- period.

Edit: Repukes

Imho, it was Independents who get turned off by partisan bickering. :shrug:

who are considered to appeal to 'independents'. McCain is running pretty strong, and Ron Paul is there to draw off even more votes. I think we should keep our focus on Democrats; electing Democrats and expecting Democrats to both lead and produce.

As for the 'bickering', this article says a bit:


Obama stump speech strategy of conciliation considered harmful

{snip}

Obama presents himself as post-partisan, but partisan politics are needed. The “food fight,” obviously a partisan food fight, is purest Equivalation. The Democrats didn’t break the world record for filibusters when they were in the minority; but the Republicans just did. And when the press covered the (very few) Democratic filibusters, they called them “filibusters.” And when the press covers the (never-ending) Republican filibusters, the word “filibuster” gets magically transmuted into the “60 votes needed to pass.” And last I checked, Democrats were allowing anybody to come to their election rallies, but Bush was screening his to make sure only Republicans attended. This is the Conservative Movement in action. Sure, there’s a “food fight,” but most of the food that’s in the air is coming from one side of the cafeteria!

So why on earth would Obama think that “tearing down” the Conservative Movement and “lifting this country up” are opposites? They’re the same! And we need the kind of politics that treats them that way. When the Swift Boat guys smeared Kerry, Kerry should have “torn them down.” Beating Bush in 2004 sure would have “lifted up” the country! Back in the McCarthy era, Margaret Chase Smith “tore down” Joe McCarthy with her Declaration of Conscience, and that sure “lifted up” the country! Sam Ervin “tore down” Richard Nixon and got started impeaching him. That lifted up the country too—‘til Gerald Ford let us down, anyway.

More importantly, we’ve given some idea, in the short history above, of how powerful, and how entrenched, the Conservative Movement has become in official Washington (the Village).*** If an election is held in 2008, and if an Democrat is elected, and is allowed to take office, and that Democrat is Obama, the Conservative Movement, and its billionaire funders, are not going to change their playbook. Why would they change what has worked out well for them? They will go right back and run the same plays that they ran when the last Democrat was elected (see Appendix I). The day that Obama touches a hair on the head of some Regent University grad who’s rewriting the work of a NASA scientist on climate change from a Christianist perspective, the howls of outrage about “hatred,” and “liberal fascism,” and “authoritarianism of the left,” and — bless their hearts — the separation of powers are going to begin, the howling is not going to let up, and the Conservative Movement and the press are going to amplify it until Obama either caves or figures out the state legislature in Springfield was Triple-A ball, not the show, grabs a bat, and gets their attention by administering an old-fashioned beat down. (Meanwhile, the Christianist will be all over the teebee, and if they pass, they’ll get a book deal. You know the drill.)

Progressive policies — this election, health insurance, above all — will be vehemently opposed by the Conservative Movement and the winger billionaires because progressive policies are not in their economic interests. In fact, they’ve been working for 30 years against progressive policies, and have been well paid to do so. They won’t change. Why would they? So, there’s going to be a food fight. Don’t we need the kind of politics that’s going to win the fight, rather than deplore it?

http://www.correntewire.com/obama_stump_speech_strategy_of_conciliation_considered_harmful

It could be that Obama and Hillary are making the calculation that the left will fall in line.

And, it seems that this cycle, there are more people identifying themselves as independents because of disgust and, from both sides of the spectrum.

Frankly, this appeal is one reason I'm backing Edwards. I don't want reconcilliation. I want a divorce.

lol

who lied and lied and lied, that's exactly what I said.

And that's exactly how I feel now about the President and his criminal cohorts - who the hell cares
about reconciling? Let's do unto them what they did unto us. Only twice as hard and twice as fast.

I have no pity on any of them.

dish it out. That's when they back down.

Love the line. I got my absentee ballot today and voted for Edwards.

Some of my family are neocons and proud of it. We normally don't talk politics bacause I do not want to reroof the house. They are thrilled Obama is doing so well and they are not supporters. One is for Ghoulini and the other for Huckleberry. I don't get it.

The Dems will be playing nice and the repukes will be "acting" like they are playing nice, all the while they are planning and plotting their evil shit behind closed doors. Mark my words...you don't EVER make a deal with these thugs. How the hell did we get in the position we're in? How did we lose control of the House and the Senate and then the WH? I'll tell you how....the freakin' repukes PLANNED IT THAT WAY with all their EVIL evoting fraud and election thefts...plotting and planning! They're STILL trying to stack the deck against us with the USA firings and installing the "LOYAL BUSHIES" and what about those "Blue Dog" Democrats who had lunch with DUNCAN HUNTER the day after the election??? And don't forget about the caging their still doing. NO. No uniting crap. It's too naive for words.:(

knife to a gun fight...so true

:hi:

thanks for the warm welcome

8 years it's that the repukes aren't interested in bipartisanship. When they were in control, they forced Dems into the damn capitol basement for God's sake. They put up a stink over threatened Dem filibusters, and the Dems backed down. Meantime they now happily filibuster every chance they get - and no one says anything. They have the Dems so shaking in their boots, Reid and Pelosi still act like they're in the goddamn minority.

And along comes Obama reaching out and proclaiming that he's going to work with these thugs. Well, no thanks. When I see a poisonous snake, I don't invite it in. Obama is beyond naive if he thinks the r's are going to make nice with him. They're just biding their time, getting coiled up, ready to unleash their venom when, and if, he gets the nom.

on the Democrats because they wouldn't leave a committee meeting he was holding? He had them removed from the room! Now the Dems want to play nice? Are they out of their minds?!

They've been giving the lesson far longer than that (at least since the 80 campaign), and many on our side still haven't learned. :(

Clinton over a stain on a dress. And our "leaders" refuse to open an impeachment inquiry for war crimes. I stand corrected.

Now, we can give them 20 years to prove they've changed, but in the meantime we'll take charge.

Bipartisanship, shmipartisanship.

I am baffled Obama is getting so much traction with his make nice strategy especially after the tsunami of criminal behaviour and downright idiocy exhibited by Repukes. Every dem should be in the face of every repuke and rub their face in all the sh*t repukes have caused, exposing every last bit of criminal stupidity, greed and hyprocrisy.

than anyone else. And JE has indicated that he'll work with pukes too. What do you think saying that he'll apoint repukes to his cabinet is meant to telegraph?

If Obama can successfully attract independents and repukes and build a massive voting block with them, great. He'll have coattails. My impression of him is that he's a very canny fighter.

How else do you think he got where he is?

I found that:

The North Carolina Democrat, who was speaking before a couple of hundred people at Hawkeye Community College, said his policy of encouraging dissent in the Cabinet would set him apart from the current president's practice. "We've seen what happens with Bush, who's surrounded himself with a bunch of 'yes people.' They all tell him how brave he is and how smart he is."

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071204/NEWS09/712040382/1001/NEWS

I can't stand it when they do this . . . Cohen, Gergen . . . do they really appeal to ANYONE in the end, on either side?

affability as a prerequisite for president. Being all things things to all to all people should raise alarm bells and have the electorate run for the hills.

It's an oldie but a goodie, still seems to wow 'em.

who wanted a slick facade for their bigotry.

Americans except for the fanatical bushbots would have turned off this sort of empty rhetoric and would be demanding the kind of leadership and JE is offering.

A smart move, given that independents (and even disaffected Republicans) are breaking very strongly for him.

That means the Dem party will be even farther to the right than it already is. Blue Dogs, now this. Just peachy. More repukes in the party....whoooooppeeeee. We need a Democrat from the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party. Looks like we'll get stuck with another Repuke lite. Wonderful. Just wonderful.

Those aren't independents on the other side of the aisle. They're repukes, and I have no interested in reaching across to them.

and they elected not to do so. Now that they're on the ropes, I say kick them in the balls... before sending them to prison.

It will be a fight all the way, and make no mistake, every dirty trick will be called into play as the last two
s)elections have taught us. The unity must start in our party, a unified front to defeat any and all repubs, and a return to accountabiilty, starting with those who should be doing time for their crimes.

nasty throats lock, stock & two smoking barrels.

since they got elected in '06...due to our Activists Effort? To see what they've been doing and talking about...one would think the Repugs & Indies got the Dems back in Congressional Control. Oops...I forgot ...they keep saying they just don't have a "Majority" so they can't do anything.

Seems to me, though, that the Repugs sort of "REWARDED" their folks when THEY got back in Power under CLINTON... But, I guess the Dems are much too "Principled" to reward THEIR FOLKS ...the ones who aren't Lobbyists...the ones who scrape by with 10, 15, 25 Dollars to donate to candidates.. We are just "petty cash money." Nothing to look at there ...just move along looking for the bigger and bigger donors with pockets that are soooooo deep. :puke:

And we shouldn't expect them to.

They're going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming into any semblance of a sane world.

K&R!

Sooner or later, you're gonna get bit.

Does "uniter, not divider" ring a bell?

Calling for unity is like calling for change. It's a buzz word to break out in campaign season.