If you have "no place to go," come here!

Kos Regroups!!!!


Even as we speak, the troops are being rallied by this fine example of soul-stirring rhetoric:

Still "All In" For Barack Obama: Fired Up and Ready To Go Forward!

It starts with an admission of defeat, and an explanation of why we should all be proud of "our" Dems anyhow:

We got our asses truly kicked in Wisconsin. The fight was worth it, because there are things worse than a good ass kicking, such as quitting before the fight. Dems and labor could have surrendered, but they did not. They tried.

On what planet, Pluto? Here on Earth, the Dems picked an antilabor candidate, and the unions took it as they always do. So yeah, they surrendered. And they didn't even pretend to try.

Next comes a history lesson:

Since 1968, after the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act, which is 44 years ago, three Democratic Presidents have been elected.

Carter in 1976, Clinton in 92 and 96, and Obama in 08. That's it. During that time, workers have continually fallen behind, and class stratification has taken off to 3rd World levels. The inequality today is as great as in the 1920s, maybe the 1890s.

Hey Pluto, maybe that's why they don't vote Dem more often.

Gitcher pompoms out for the concluding cheer:

I'm all in for Barack Obama. Fuck the loss in Wisconsin. It's time to be fired up and ready to go forward.

Anything you say, Plu...zzzzzzzzzzz

No votes yet


Miguel Sanchez's picture
Submitted by Miguel Sanchez on

Cheer up, old man. The Big Push is coming and will soon teach Gerry a lesson.

Submitted by brucedixon on

Didn't know that. I ain't close to what happens in WI. I heard he had a black running mate, a firefighter to boot. That's all you're supposed to need, right?

Submitted by Randall Kohn on

From The American Prospect:

Meet Tom Barrett

Abby Rapoport
May 9, 2012

Four things to know about the Democrat facing off against Wisconsin's Scott Walker

Last night, Wisconsin Democrats chose Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett as their candidate to go up against Governor Scott Walker. Barrett's pretty well known to Wisconsinites, both as a U.S. congressman and as a previous gubernatorial candidate. But most of us weren't all that interested in Wisconsin until Walker passed his anti-union laws and the widespread protestss began last year. Since then, the race has developed a national following—and some say, has national implications. With only a few weeks until the recall, meet the man Democrats are hoping will beat Scott Walker:

1. Irony of ironies, he's hardly a union favorite.

Even though the recall has largely been painted as a fight between pro-labor and anti-labor groups, Barrett was hardly the first pick for Wisconsin unions. Rather, former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk had the bulk of union support early on. From the state AFL-CIO, the the Wisconsin Education Association Council to AFSCME, almost all the major unions backed Falk. In fact, they were so intent of a Falk victory that they actively discouraged Barrett from running. It's not shocking—Barrett went up against the Wisconsin teachers union in a fight over reform in the Milwaukee Public Schools.

Barrett waited until hours after the recall was official to throw in his hat, and in his declaration, specifically labasted Walker's anti-union policies. It may not have helped him much then, but immediately after his victory Tuesday night, Barrett had labor support. Both the Education Association Council and the AFSCME sent statements endorsing Barrett against Walker. It's a good thing, too—without union support, it's unlikely It's not the first time Barrett has enjoyed union support of course. When he ran against Walker in 2010, his top ten donors were unions, according to the Center for Public Integrity.

So I guess he's pro-union rhetorically, and financially (i.e., he takes their money). He's only anti-union on policy issues. Ya gotta love it.

Submitted by brucedixon on

Didn't know that. I ain't close to what happens in WI. I heard he had a black running mate, a firefighter to boot. That's all you're supposed to need, right?