Reward Good Behavior – DADT Repeal Passes House
The standalone DADT repeal bill passed a vote in the U.S. House of Representatives today 250-175. Mike Castle was one of 15 Republicans to vote yes. I plan on calling Mike Castle’s office to thank him for voting yes on DADT repeal and also for voting yes on the DREAM Act.
Wilmington Office
201 N. Walnut Street, Suite 107
Wilmington, DE 19801-3970
p: 302.428.1902
f: 302.428.1950
Dover Office
300 South New Street
Dover, DE 19904
p: 302.736.1666
f: 302.736.6580
Georgetown Office
p: 302.856.3334
Washington Office
1233 Longworth HOB
Washington, DC 20515
p: 202.225.4165
f: 202.225.2291
Tags: DADT, Mike Castle
Now the bill goes to the Senate. Will it die there?
Hopeful but cynical:
meaningless. The scumpublicans will kill it.
UI–I am proud to know you, and see such gracious behavior at play. Although, I am not okay with the Dream Act–I think it’s great to let legislators know when you liked what they did. Our 50-50 citizenry is a tough client to work for. Your acknowledgement of the good Mike Castle is stand-up. BRAVO!!!!
Yes… graciousness is always good as long as it doesn’t rob you or your team of the energy or will to accomplish goals or punish the guilty. Graciousness is not the goal itself; it is – well, it is a grace. Graciousness is a sometimes-useful complement to forcefulness, energy, and even aggression.
useful complement to forcefulness, energy, and even aggression
This is pretty rich coming from someone who can’t manage any of these except from a keyboard at all the wrong targets.
At this point in my life I am making my political statement by raising my kids as best I can. It takes a lot of time. How about yourself?
At this point in my life I am making my political statement by raising my kids as best I can
Well *there’s* progessiveism you can believe in. Bill Clinton’s <a href="http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/12/08/the-more-things-change-5/assessment comes in handy again:
Greider’s contribution in “Secrets Of The Temple” and “The Education of David Stockman” was and still is worth more than the actions of any individual activist.
See, that is what you don’t get about teamwork. Every person doesn’t have to be a complete package at every point throughout their life. Some of our best progressives in Delaware can’t write worth a damn. And some of our best writers can’t get out of their chairs. And others may surpass your contribution later in life. But if everyone sticks together on the issues, everyone has a role and the team can win.
But if some team members start thinking their contribution is more valuable, and denigrating what others can give, then we lose. Which we did.
Which, of course, doesn’t address Clinton’s core point. And it is self-serving of you to retreat to the fake victimization of pretending that people think that their contributions are more valuable. At this stage for progressives everywhere, it is a question of contributions PERIOD. The teamwork is pretty focused and hanging out on blogs and haranguing people who might be your allies ain’t the work that’s called for. If you aren’t doing the work, then you really should stand down on the rabble rousing until you can join in. Then you can talk about teamwork. But in the meantime, Clinton’s core point still is pertinent — especially for those progressives who think that blogging is some substitute for political work.
Anon: So what you’re saying is that the anger is your message. Not the facts, not the logic — the anger. Because that’s the only thing people have asked you to tone down.
“If you aren’t doing the work, then you really should stand down on the rabble rousing until you can join in.”
Even if you join in, the status quo party loyalists (the most pernicious “purists”) still won’t find any rabble rousing acceptable or desirable, which raises the question: When is rabble rousing ever deemed desirable or necessary? What is the criteria for its acceptability? The status quo party loyalists never say. They merely confine themselves to condemning and squelching rabble rousing whenever they see it.
You probably need to ask whoever the status quo party loyalists might be that question. From where I sit, rabble rousing needs to not physically hurt people, not destroy other people’s property and be *directed in a place where it might be useful*. And from where I sit, I’d be grateful for enough rabble rousing that would get Tom Carper’s attention periodically. This is someone who pretty routinely votes against progressive interests — and if the local progressives’ world view is correct, there ought to be enough Delawareans out there willing to reach out to him enough to rattle his cage. But here we are — with Tom Carper never paying any price for his voting habits.