Delaware Dem's Latest Posts
Carper Leaning Yes. Coons Leans War.
Unthankfully, Chris Coons, supposedly the smart one, is leaning no.
Sen. Chris Coons, who was personally lobbied by President Barack Obama and national security adviser Susan Rice to back the deal during a trip to Africa in July, said the view of the accord was about evenly split in his home state of Delaware in the first few days after the announcement. But the Democrat now says telephone calls against the deal outnumber those in favor by 10-to-1 in his state, an avalanche of opposition he has no choice but to listen to.
“I am a Democrat, and I would like to be able to support this agreement,” Coons said. “But I have serious reservations about it.”
Let me make some things crystal clear for the Senator.
If you vote no, you are not a Democrat.
If you vote no, you want and desire immediate war.
The day after you vote no, you and I can meet at Elaine Manlove’s office, and I will help you fill out the forms to change your registration to the Republican Party.
Your next election is not until 2020, but I will make it my life’s work to deny you renomination and reelection. You will be the Joe Lieberman of Delaware. You think we hold Tom Carper in disdain for his moderation at times, just wait to see what we do to you.
I can give two shits about conservative astro-turf phone calls to your office. This is one of those issues where you substitute your own judgment and your knowledge for the people’s rather than just being a conduit of what an unintelligent Sussex County teabagger thinks.
And if you genuinely have reservations about this deal, let me tell you something: everyone has reservations about this deal. This is a deal with an adversary. An enemy. Someone and something we do not trust. If you did not have reservations about this deal, you would be an idiot. I have reservations about this deal. We have to see whether Iran sticks to it. That is my reservation. And if they do not, guess what Senator… WE CAN BOMB THEM THEN. WE CAN REIMPOSE SANCTIONS THEN. WE CAN GO TO WAR THEN.
To vote no now means you unequivocally want war now. It means you do not want to even give peace and inspections a chance. It means you have no brain. It means you are a Republican.
If you are really taking into account the phone calls of those who do nothing all day but sit at home and watch Fox News, please remember, they voted for Christine O’Donnell. They never voted for you. They never will. And besides, your next election is in 2020. Chances are they will be dead by then anyway.
Seriously though, to base a vote of this importance on feedback your office receives makes me question your suitability and ability to perform your job. It also makes me think you are a coward. Whether you fear the voters or you fear your donors, or both, you are still acting out of fear.
DL readers, since it appears the so wise Senator places great value on the calls he gets, take a moment and call 202-224-5042, say you are a Democrat, say that he will support the Iran Deal or he will not be the Democratic nominee in 2020. Say all that.
It’s time to clobber our mealy mouthed federal representation over the head.
Wednesday Open Thread [8.5.15]
![Wednesday Open Thread [8.5.15]](http://delawareliberal.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Open.ThreadC-240x180.png "Wednesday Open Thread [8.5.15]")
Katrina vanden Heuvel previews tomorrow’s Republican debate and offers up a list of topics and questions:
Nervous Republican officials can take some solace that the debate is moderated by three Fox News stalwarts. They are unlikely to dwell on the irresistible questions raised by the absurdities that Republican candidates have offered up in the last months. Fox News anchors will no doubt try to get candidates to vent their venom on Hillary Clinton and President Obama rather than on each other. Candidates will have one minute to answer questions, time only for expressing an attitude, not a policy. […] But my advice — neither solicited nor likely to be followed — would be to pose questions that explore the yawning divide between these candidates and the vast majority of Americans. For example:
Inequality and stagnant wages: This is a central concern of Americans. The minimum wage today is $7.25 an hour, far below the poverty wage for a family of four. Cities and states across the country are acting to lift it. In 2014, voters in four red states — South Dakota, Nebraska, Arkansas and Alaska — passed referendums to hike their minimum wages. Seventy percent of Americans agree. Obama and all Democratic presidential candidates support raising the national minimum wage. Yet, Republican leaders in the House and Senate won’t even let it come to a vote in Congress. Wisconsin’s Walker has called the minimum wage a “lame idea” that he does not believe “serves a purpose.” A question on the minimum wage would be enlightening.[…]
What’s the matter with Kansas?: Republicans have argued for decades that lower taxes, less government spending and less regulation would boost the economy. In Kansas, Republican Gov. Sam Brownback championed that program, promising that zeroing out taxes on most businesses, cutting top rates and slashing spending would generate growth, jobs and revenue. The result has been deficits as far as the eye can see, with Republicans in the state legislature now scrambling for ways to raise taxes. The candidates should be asked what’s the matter with Kansas — and how that has informed their agenda.
Fair taxes: Most Americans are bothered by the sense that the rich and corporations don’t pay their fair share of taxes. Obama has urged passage of the Buffett Rule that no millionaire should pay a lower tax rate than his or her secretary. Would these candidates be willing to raise taxes on the wealthy? Would they support a minimum tax on corporations like GE that often end up paying nothing in taxes while earning billions in profits? Would they act to shut down tax havens and tax multinationals at the same rate as domestic businesses?
….And now the shooting down of the trial balloon. (Updated with Resignation Bombshell)
[UPDATE]: This will teach me to read the full article that I am linking to first before posting. Apparently, according to unnamed sources in the Times article I link to below, Vice President Joe Biden considered resigning in the aftermath of Beau Biden’s death to care for his grieving family. This further convinces me he is not running. How do you go from thinking of resigning because of family to running for President in a span of two months? The answer is you don’t. What we are seeing is a pressure campaign put on by those like Dick Harpoolitan, Biden’s South Carolina operative, to force Biden into the race.
—-
The New York Times reports that friends and supporters of Joe Biden are concerned that a third run for the Presidency could harm his legacy. Consider me among them.
“Those supporters, in the White House and the Senate, and within the political circles he has moved in for decades, fear that the legacy Mr. Biden has built as an effective partner who took on tough jobs for President Obama, not to mention the deep reservoir of public good will and sympathy he has amassed in his poignant handling of personal tragedies, could be sacrificed in the pursuit of an unsuccessful challenge to Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic nomination.”
“They fret that Mr. Biden, as well known for his undisciplined, sometimes self-immolating comments as he is for his charm on the trail, could endanger Mr. Obama’s own legacy by injuring Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy and causing his party to lose control of the White House.”
What is the GOP thinking?
Why make this election about women’s healthcare and abortion? Are they drunk? Did they fall down and hit their head?
Is Joe Biden running for President?
Joe Biden’s sister, Valerie Biden Owens, who has managed all of his prior campaigns for the Senate and the Presidency, said today that she has not had a “single conversation with him about it,” with “it” being running for President in 2016.
If she is telling the truth, then that means that Joe Biden is not running for President.
So that little boomlet was fun.
Tuesday Open Thread [8.4.15]
![Tuesday Open Thread [8.4.15]](http://delawareliberal.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Open.ThreadD-240x180.png "Tuesday Open Thread [8.4.15]")
New York Times: “After weeks of preparing for a smash-mouth debate with Donald J. Trump, 14 Republican candidates found themselves instead Trump-less but sandwiched into a constricting format on Monday night, delivering strikingly uneven performances just days before the first big test of the presidential primary contest.”
“Rather than making the other contenders look more presidential, however, the event, at St. Anselm College in Manchester, N.H., seemed to shrink the candidates. Assembled in the front row, the Republicans gawked as each rival took his or her turn on stage, looking at times as if they were being forced to sit through a tedious school assembly.”
Monday Open Thread [8.3.15]
![Monday Open Thread [8.3.15]](http://delawareliberal.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Open.ThreadE-240x180.png "Monday Open Thread [8.3.15]")
Donald Trump makes mainstream Republicans angry, understandably. His inflammatory rhetoric and sudden rise toward the top of 2016 presidential polls threaten their careers.
Yet Republican political leaders themselves bear some responsibility for Mr. Trump’s ascent. In dealing with the dyspeptic constituency that has empowered them, they’ve repeatedly failed at anger management.Throughout Barack Obama’s presidency, the Republican Party has been a hothouse of grievance: against his health care law, his immigration policy, even his citizenship. The ire of conservatives helped Republican candidates wrest control from the Democrats of the House in 2010 and the Senate in 2014.
But the inability of party leaders to control that intensity has often backfired. In primary campaigns, it has toppled effective Republican lawmakers.
Recent Comments