I don't think "...both parties are the same..." and that America should "...hit rock bottom..."

[uponit7771]

...and I'm surprised to see > 300 people on DU who are OK with that shit.

It seems like the thing that's been "enabled" is a relative few people to work DU....

Thank you

[SidDithers]

1. K&R...nt

Sid

[Lunabelle]

2. Both parties AREN'T the same

Sure, there are those in our party who lean more right and want to compromise more than we progressives would like. But we are not the same! I will never fall for the "don't vote it doesn't matter anyway" schtick. Maybe my vote gets thrown away or flips to rethuglican because of some Diebold evil scheme, but call me an optimist, I think it matters.

[gateley]

5. I agree - there are too many similarities, but a LOT of very IMPORTANT

differences. I don't understand people who think it would be no more, no less under a Republican administration. :shrug:

That's what they probably thought in Wisconsin, too.

[Liberal Veteran]

11. One would think Indecision 2000 would have put paid to that "just alike" nonsense.

People touting the "just alike" meme me wonder if there isn't really something to the "chemtrail" nonsense.

[AlabamaLibrul]

16. While I don't agree they're "just alike", one would have hoped that 2008 is what could have put it

to bed forever.

Sadly we remain stuck with lesser of two evils all over again.

[Liberal Veteran]

18. I disagree. Plus, we have Citizen's United to contend with as well as the Tea-Bigots.

...who are being funded by some very deep pockets.

Add in a hefty sprinkling of blue dogs and a dash of Lieberman and it puts things into a whole other light.

[gateley]

17. Well I'm not sure there ISN'T something to the chemtrail nonsense,

but I still see BIG differences between the Democrats and Republicans. :7 :hi:

[OffWithTheirHeads]

3. If we're not already heading toward rock bottom rapidly

then what am I doing in this handbasket?

[uponit7771]

4. DU isn't the real world

[OffWithTheirHeads]

7. Tell that to my 401K.

[Liberal Veteran]

10. Back in the olden days we had these things called "pensions".

Before Wall St. got the brilliant idea that they could get a shitload of cash if we did away with those pesky antiquated pensions.

[JoePhilly]

25. I have to question whether or not you have one.

I have one ... and my wife and I have fully funded it for each year since 94.

Its been a great investment.

First there is the tax break. In recent years, the max for a couple fully funding meant about 32k of income, per year, for which the taxes are deferred.

Second, there is the company match programs, which have generally been in the "dollar for dollar" range, up to about 6% of salary.

Third, during those years, I've maintained a fairly simply strategy. When the DOW is at or above a 2 year high, I convert a larger % to an investment that is basically cash. Not everything, but I've been up to 75% at times. Similarly, when the DOW gets down to, or below a 2 year low, I start to shift money back into stocks. Again, not everything, but more.

As for my regular contributions, those I target based on the current levels ... and so, recently when the DOW was above 12.5k, that was too high to be buying more ... so I'm putting most of my current contributions into a money market fund, that is basically cash ... I was waiting for the DOW to hit 10.5 or so, before changing the mix some.

With the GOP obstructing everything, and doing their best to kill the economy, the potential for the DOW to drop lower remains. If it does, I'll be taking more cash off the sidelines.

I also watch the % changes over 2-3 year periods, and I'll factor that into the shifts I make.

So my basic point is that if you manage your 401k, it should be doing pretty well. On paper, we're all down some since April, but that's one quarter ... what was the DOW last summer, the summer before that, and the one before that? And as the Bush DOW Average jumped from a running average of about 12k to about 14k ... what did you do? Me, I started to take gains and build up my cash position, so that when the DOW cam back down (which it was going to do because there was no reason to go from 12k to 14k that fast), I wanted to be able to buy low.

[Liberal Veteran]

6. KnR. - I'm at the point where I think there is some intent to demoralize the base.

[Lunabelle]

8. there are always gonna be trolls who encourage you to not vote for some leftist reason.

I don't trust that at all.

[Joe Fields]

29. Hey, I see you've been a proud member since....oh yeah, this year.

Do you even know what a troll is?

Well, I've been a member here for oh, say...probably half of your life, and I've been around this earth for longer than you can count. I was born and raised a REAL Democrat, and I have no use for those of you who don't know what that is, or are so willing to discard basic human principle for a party that has been hijacked. So...take that troll talk and stuff it where the sun don't shine.

[uponit7771]

9. Yeap, just edited my OP....I beleive this joint is getting worked good

[girl gone mad]

12. The demoralization already happened..

when the left was called "fucking retards", told they needed to be drug tested, completely shut out of the debate on health care, largely ignored on economic and financial reform matters... actually, you name it - environmental policy, education, agriculture, foreign policy, trade - we've been overrun, told to sit down, shut up, eat our peas and like it.

How should progressives react? Should we embrace and defend a corporatist, right-leaning President who is now failing on almost every level?

Imagine if the President had gone to the left and had enacted single payer, $$multi-trillion fiscal stimulus, strong financial reform, corporate-unfriendly education and environmental policies, had started winding down foreign wars and aggressively promoting fair trade, and all the while had encouraged his people to shower insults on neoliberals and moderates. Then imagine that he was still facing a rapidly deteriorating economy with high unemployment and poor poll numbers, as he is now. Would the "centrists" and neoliberals still embrace and defend him?

[Liberal Veteran]

13. Yeah, imagine in those 49 days we had a supermajority, President Obama sprinkled fairy dust..

....over all our woes.

It took 30-40 years of hard work by the nutjobs on the right to fuck things up. If you don't think just as much work will be needed to clean up the mess (and it is so much easier to destroy than create, mind you), then I don't know how to convince you.

Think of it this way, you are driving 100 miles an hour on an icy road and you need to turn around. Do you slam on the brakes and turn the wheel?

It is going to take a lot more than the paralysis of self-pity to move this juggernaut in the right direction.

[uponit7771]

20. Damn, 50 days....I was giving him 5 months...Thx for this info, some of these people are unreasonabl

[girl gone mad]

22. Didn't answer my question.

What if, instead of making secret deals to kill the public option, Obama had fought for real health care reform? What if he had appointed Paul Krugman and Michael Hudson to head his economic team, instead of Rubin and Summers? What if he had fought for Elizabeth Warren and empowered Bill Black and Eliot Spitzer to go after Wall Street crimes? What if he had gotten us out of Iraq and Afghanistan? What if Obama had made unemployment the core focus of his economic agenda over the last couple of years, rather than the deficit? What if he had put someone like Randall Wray (who believes in full employment) in charge of his jobs panel rather than Jeff Immelt (who believes in mass outsourcing)?

I could go on and on, but here is the point: had he chosen a more reasonable, progressive approach, rather than taking us full speed into neoliberal clusterfuckland, we would probably be a lot better off right now. But, if we weren't - if Obama's popularity was taking a hit and these policies were failing the way his chosen policies are now failing, would the "centrists" still embrace and defend him the way they expect progressives to now?

In my view, the neoliberals would attack him, even if his progressive policies were wildly successful, which is why they tend to get what they want. If progressives really want to succeed, we will have to be just as relentless. We can't keep rolling over for Reagan's nth term while every little bit of good remaining in this country is destroyed so that a handful of lazy, greedy people can get keep getting richer.

[Liberal Veteran]

26. Well, I guess that puts us in an interesting position, n'est-ce pas?

Are you willing to throw the country to the tender mercies of the tea-publicans or are you going to keeping working the rudder with the rest of us to turn this boat back around? Inch by inch, if necessary.

[uponit7771]

19. Another false statement...you guys are working these boards pretty hard these days

[Joe Fields]

30. Wow, just wow! A girl after my own heart.

I think I'd love to protest with you sometime...

:toast:

[billh58]

14. Spoken like a

true Liberal Democrat! Thank you for contributing to the promotion of sanity and reason on DU.

[mmonk]

15. Clearly they are not the same. One party takes no prisoners.

[uppityperson]

21. k&r, me either. I understand the frustration, but they aren't the same and we shouldn't

hit bottom as too many more people will suffer. I also don't agree with the insults there either. Guess it's ok to call Dems assholes now. Incredible.

[treestar]

23. Agree. I'm starting to see that as evil

Purely helping Republicans by giving up.

[upi402]

24. enabling corporatists to disenfranchise us IS 'evil'

so anyway, if someone who supports a choice between 2 corporatists sees me as an "evil-doer", I'm proud of that.

Stop being part of the problem. Wake up and take our party back!

[A Simple Game]

27. By giving up? Is that any worse than aiding and abetting?

Lately the only difference I see is Republicans will smile and stab you in the gut, but the Democrats will just stab you in the back and hope you don't bleed on them.

[mvd]

28. They aren't the same, regardless of what you think of..

the centrist philosophy. Even a Romney would wreck the economy with sure tax cuts with no revenue increases, have bad Supreme Court picks, try to restrict abortion, try to curtail progress on GLBT rights, go back to the Bush foreign policy (at least the President's is thought out), and hurt the environment, among others.