Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

TheKentuckian

(26,314 posts)
42. Then those that we oppose have already won. They don't have to do anything different
Wed Mar 18, 2015, 10:04 AM
Mar 2015

too many will huff and puff and scream and holler but in the end it is just noise and will go along with whatever is served so there is no actual need to change the menu and all the bluster can be safely ignored.

What difference does opposition make if you know exactly where it will fold?

We'll be right back here in four or eight years with an even more right wing Manchurian Trojan Horse but the TeaPubliKlans will have some villains and the window keeps moving.

For fuck's sake! Almost two years out with no nominee and already folks are prefolding, unable to even maintain an illusion to apply a little pressure much less the real knife work required to oust or even weaken the hand of the Turd Way in the party.

The digging is our collective grave and it never stops, we can't move the needle on that much less really change the direction if there is no beachhead to fight from.
Graves are holes to deposit corpses into, no it doesn't matter who is digging my grave because the end is the same a dirt nap.

If the plan from jump is unconditional surrender then what is the purpose of fighting at all, may as well get the transcript of Lanny Davis talking points memorized, swear fealty to Dimon and Blankfein, join PNAC, set up a live stream of your life to the NSA, and join the Rainbow Ronnie coalition full throatedly it seems to me.
What is the practical difference?

The more desperate the situation the more resolved people seem to be to keep doing what caused the desperation.

The false risk aversion of the desperate is so easy to manipulate.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Time for Change [View all] rhett o rick Mar 2015 OP
k&r whereisjustice Mar 2015 #1
People are fearful, not hopeful. They'll accept a Clinton for fear of a Bush. NYC_SKP Mar 2015 #2
That is where I'm at. I'll fight with everything I have against hrc until she's Doctor_J Mar 2015 #3
If it helps, Doctor_J, just remind yourself that you're voting for a Supreme Court picker. calimary Mar 2015 #11
Amen..... daleanime Mar 2015 #21
Then those that we oppose have already won. They don't have to do anything different TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #42
While the fear of Bush might explain some of it, it's also the fear of change. rhett o rick Mar 2015 #6
+100 appalachiablue Mar 2015 #12
Fear of Change Martin Eden Mar 2015 #16
Fear works for the repubs, not for the dems n2doc Mar 2015 #9
We would have been better off rephrasing that fear of a R majority to hope that a Democratic jwirr Mar 2015 #18
And someone who won't get anthraxed. nt valerief Mar 2015 #4
Or whose car won't accidently run into a tree at high speed. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #7
pretending to be morally pure. stonecutter357 Mar 2015 #5
Who is "pretending to be morally pure."? and how does that relate to the OP? nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #10
I think it is like Hodur saying nothing but "Hodur" That gibberish Dragonfli Mar 2015 #35
Means not being an amoral unprincipled fuck lacking all consistency as far as I can tell. TheKentuckian Mar 2015 #43
How do we galvanize the people so they vote that way? treestar Mar 2015 #8
I disagree that most people are satisfied with their lot. I don't know what circles you rhett o rick Mar 2015 #13
You know these people treestar Mar 2015 #25
I miss Time for Change. OnyxCollie Mar 2015 #14
I agree. I didn't notice that my subject was the name of a previous DU'er until after I posted. rhett o rick Mar 2015 #15
He said he will be posting sometime soon. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #44
Huzzah! OnyxCollie Mar 2015 #45
Agree 100%. Hell Hath No Fury Mar 2015 #17
We do need another FDR but right now I would be happy with an Eisenhower. n/t A Simple Game Mar 2015 #24
THIS is the absolutely best thread I have seen in a long long time. Thank everyone who has posted. jwirr Mar 2015 #19
I'll jump on the band wagon as soon as an "electable" change candidate announces. Fla Dem Mar 2015 #20
K&R kacekwl Mar 2015 #22
We May Need More Options colsohlibgal Mar 2015 #23
Hmmm ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #26
Let me try to guess your point. Since most of us get paid from some corporation rhett o rick Mar 2015 #27
It seems to me you are trying to find something in my post to be OUTRAGED about. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #29
Quite the contrary. Seems to me you were trying to rationalize that bribery rhett o rick Mar 2015 #30
Only in your head ... Only in your head ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #31
Apparently I failed to grasp what you were trying to insinuate. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #32
Yes ... You did. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #33
There are still government employees aspirant Mar 2015 #28
Don't forget the unemployed. nm rhett o rick Mar 2015 #34
Elizabeth Warren has the buzz, the zeitgeist, the energy Dems to Win Mar 2015 #36
I think the risk is high for her. The Democratic Party Machine will back H. Clinton. rhett o rick Mar 2015 #37
Agreed. I won't blame Liz, I'll blame the Dem leadership Dems to Win Mar 2015 #40
K&R through the roof marym625 Mar 2015 #38
Time Has Come Today Alkene Mar 2015 #39
Yes, we need someone who is independent of the powers who currently run our country Time for change Mar 2015 #41
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Populist Reform of the Democratic Party»Time for Change»Reply #42