When pussies learn to fight, the bullies back off

[yesthattom]

Dear friends that said Democrats shouldn’t “fight back”,

When I was in 3rd grade I got beaten up a lot at the bus stop by Keith Brown. When my parents brought this to the attention of the Principal, Keith claimed that I had picked the fight with him. Being half his size this was laughable, but the principal believed them. It went on for months. Finally my next door neighbor, who was a cop, gave me some fighting lessons. One thing he showed me was how to give a solid punch right to the nose. Just summon all my strength, take a deep breath, aim, and connect. The secret of the nose-punch is that if you connect, there’s a good chance that you’ll cause a nose bleed. A nose bleed isn’t going to kill anyone but it sure looks impressive when the bully comes to school with blood all over his shirt. It was exactly what I needed.

The next time Keith picked on me, I took a boxer’s stance. He hit my shoulder with a right punch. I countered: Deep breath, aim, *pow*. Nose bleed. I had connected.

Of course, now the Principal was convinced that I was the bully and it was Keith that needed protection but it was a moot point: Keith never picked on me again. Nobody picked on me for 5 years. That was 8th grade. As you can imagine, *pow* and Michael Gormley was walking out of the boy’s locker room at Frelinghuysen Junior Highschool crying like a baby.

I haven’t had to hit anyone since. I haven’t had to.

I have a profound understand the importance of pussies learn to fight back. Electronics repair geek Bernard Getz shooting punks on a NY subway car in self-defense, the geek in John Hughes’s The Breakfast Club bringing a gun to school to scare the jocks that were picking on him... these are totally different experiences for me. These are people learning to fight back and being misunderstood by a society full of bullies that have grown up to be federal prosecutors and highschool Principals.

For the longest time I’ve been writing in this LJ that Democrats need to stop being pussies and fight back. Oh, you’ve told me “it’ll just make things worst” and “the Democrats will just look like they’re whining”. I was told that taking the day off to help disenfranchised African-American voters from Ohio share their experiences with the Senate would somehow send the wrong message. (If “black votes should be counted” is the wrong message, then what is the right message?).

Well guess what? The Democrats have started fighting back and it’s working. This week is the tipping point. In just this last week you’ll find:

• Bush’s plan to End Social Security is losing support.
• The attacks on Harry Reid have stopped because Reid fought back instead of being a Democrat pussy.
• Republicans are backing off of their “nuclear threat” to get rid of the filibuster because the Democrats have pushed back.
• Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) are trailing Democratic candidates who haven’t even announced yet because Democrats aren’t acting like pussies that are afraid to kick the playground bully’s ass once in a while.
• Democrats rumored to be planning retirement have announced they’re running for re-election.

I’ll repeat what I said months ago... if fighting for what you believe in is wrong, what is the solution? To fight for the other side?

Of course not. The solution is to stop being pussies. Every wimp has to learn how to fight someday. Being anti-war doesn’t mean you can’t fight for what you believe in. Being pro-peace doesn’t mean you can’t be aggressive about winning politically.

--Tom

---

Dear DSCC friend, First of all, I should apologize for being so quiet.  Things in Washington are just getting started again, so there hasn’t been a whole lot to rant about.  This week, however...  Well, suffice it to say that I have plenty to talk about. Give ‘em hell with Harry I want to give a huge thank you from all of us at the DSCC to the thousands of you who signed last week’s petition.  Have you noticed how the Republicans have suddenly stopped attacking Harry Reid?  Looks like you all put a scare into them. Senator Reid and Senator Schumer have talked a lot about how we are building a new Democratic Party that’s not afraid to take a stand when principles are at stake and won’t shy away from a fight.  By signing the petition and making a contribution, you are literally putting your money where your mouth is and backing up the Senators’ claims. It’s not too late to get your friends and family to sign the petition and join us in standing up to Republican attacks.  Just forward them this link: http://action.dscc.org/campaign/reid Remember, this kind of thing is just practice for the more important fights that I assure you are just around the corner. Speaking of fights... This week, George Bush re-nominated a dozen federal court judges Senate Democrats have already rejected as being too far outside of the mainstream to deserve a lifetime appointment to federal appeals court.  Republican Senate Majority Leader has threatened to “go nuclear” and end the filibuster as we know it if Democrats try to stop them again.  Sounds a little like the playground threat to take the ball and go home, doesn’t it? First of all, let’s look at the facts.  Democrats have only used the filibuster to block 10 judicial nominees.  More than 200 other nominees have been approved by the Senate.  That’s more than 95% - better than Clinton, better than Papa Bush, even better than Reagan.  The nominations we’ve opposed have all posed serious threats to our basic constitutional liberties including the right to choose, the right to have your vote counted, and the right to breathe clean air and drink clean water. I think Senator Kennedy said it best: “The president looks like he is still more interested in picking fights than picking judges.”  Senate Democrats are committed to protecting our fundamental rights and will combat George Bush’s efforts to pack the courts with right wing judges.  And if they try to undo decades of Senate tradition by ending our right to filibuster when necessary?  Well, let’s just say that we’ll be ready for them. Remember, all of this is just dress rehearsal for a Supreme Court vacancy.  You can be certain that this issue will dominate the Senate for a long time to come.  Get ready. Did he not get the memo? Despite his claims otherwise, it looks like Bill Frist won’t have an easy time killing the filibuster even if he wants to.  On Tuesday, Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson praised the unique tradition by speaking on the Senate floor how the Iraqi Kurds - a minority in that country - are confident their views will be respected and their input will be valued by the country’s new government. Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Saleh recently called the filibuster his people’s “secret weapon” in a meeting with Isakson.  This caused the proud American Senator to gush that the filibuster is “the way they would ensure that the majority never overran the minority.” Well said, Mr. Senator.  Well said. At the Races Never before I have seen two incumbent Republicans in this much trouble so early in the cycle.  New polls show that both Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) are trailing Democratic candidates who haven’t even announced yet.  That’s pretty unprecedented for two years out.  This is huge news and makes me very happy about our prospects for 2006. Now, a full state-by-state breakdown. Pennsylvania: Things aren’t looking good for Santorum after a Quinnipiac University poll shows he barely cracks 50 when matched up with any of 4 potential Democratic challengers.  In fact, he even trails in one of the hypothetical contests.  Remember, this is a two-term incumbent Senator matched up against Democrats who haven’t even announced their candidacies yet. Rhode Island: Chafee (R-RI) has got those blue state blues after learning about a new Brown University poll that shows him with dangerously low numbers against not one, but two prominent Democratic challengers.  In a head-to-head race, the poll has Rep. Jim Langevin beating Chafee handily by a margin of 44-27 while Chafee garners a paltry 39 percent against Secretary of State Matt Brown.  These numbers are very similar to an earlier poll conducted by the DSCC. Michigan: Republicans in Michigan are now looking for their fourth choice to take on Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) after two elected officials from suburban Oakland County decided they would not enter the race.  Indeed, Oakland County Sheriff Michael Bouchard publicly announced his candidacy only to drop out 10 days later, citing a non-life-threatening health concern.  Rep. Candice Miller (R-MI) previously announced that she would not run. Vermont: The Republican Governor of Vermont, Jim Douglas, announced this week that he would not campaign against his “longtime friend” Sen. Jim Jeffords (I-VT) because of the GOP’s extreme rightward drift.  Jeffords remains a top target of the national Republicans, but they face an uphill battle in the face of Douglas’ all-but-endorsement. New Mexico: Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) ended speculation he would retire this week by announcing that he would seek a fifth term in ’06.  When an incumbent Democrat retires, it is much harder for us to retain that seat, so these kinds of announcements make our day. Hawaii:  Ditto, Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI). Minnesota:  Unfortunately, Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN) has decided not to run for re-election in ‘.  He’s been a great senator for the people of Minnesota.  A spirited contest to fill this seat is expected, but we are confident it will stay in Democratic hands.  Best Regards, Anne H. Lewis If you would like to contribute to the DSCC, click here. Visit the web address below to tell your friends about this.  Tell-a-friend! If you received this message from a friend, you can sign up for DSCC. This message was sent to talgraham@limoncelli.org. Visit your subscription management page to modify your email communication preferences or update your personal profile. To stop ALL email from DSCC, click to remove yourself from our lists (or reply via email with “remove” in the subject line).

Comments

[lillilah]

I totally agree!

[tn-grrl.livejournal.com]

I'm having an interesting response to this if only because my brother's name is Keith Brown. Though I think he got picked on, too. When he wasn't being a jerk. I guess you can tell we don't exactly get along.

It's always kind of jarring seeing my brother's name out there - there's a Keith Brown on one of the poly lists, and it's always a trip first thinking "well maybe I do have something in common with my brother." *grin*

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

His nickname was "Ki-ki". It was actually an impediment because so few people outside the school knew his real name but the administrators only knew his real name.

[cpj.livejournal.com]

The kid in Breakfast Club was trying to commit suicide, not to scare off the jocks.

And not to be a total smart-ass, but how would Colombine shootings fit in your scenario of pussies fighting back.

I'm not above kicking someone's ass, but the problem with some geeks is the anger builds up too much because they never properly reacted earlier.

Well put

[mrfantasy.livejournal.com]

There is a difference between violence and strength. Violence would have been beating Keith Brown to a senseless pulp. Strength was what you did. Strength is what we need to counteract what's been happening in this country.

Re: Well put

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

Thank you, Mike. You drew out the essence of what I was trying to say better than I did!

[barking-iguana.livejournal.com]

I’ll repeat what I said months ago... if fighting for what you believe in is wrong, what is the solution? To fight for the other side?

Fighting for what you believe in is right. For electoral politicans to publicly and honestly fight for everything they believe in all at the same time is rarely effective. That's why the Republicans lie about so much of their agenda.

The Democratic base is, as a whole, less tolerant of liars than the Republicans are. Maybe that's a bad thing, maybe it's good. But it puts the Democrats in an awkward position of trying to duck issues without actually deceiving anyone. That worked with the 1970's zeitgeist; it doesn't work now. It means that an immature man-child like Bill Clinton is effective, because he's able to believe his own inconsistancies. But more mature candidates like Kerry come across as untrustable ciphers.

But suppose that Kerry were to let it all hang out. Or suppose that you had no searchable history of behavior, but every opinion you've expressed was searchable and you were running for President. Do you think that's a recipe for winning? I agree with Barney Frank's sentiment when he said "If I thought all of my positions were appropriate for a Presidential candidate, I'd run myself."

IMO, to win at the national level, we need someone who will fight for what s/he believes in, but not yet (unfortunately) for everything you and I believe in.

Bad example

[qnetter]

Unfortunately, it's pretty obvious that Bernhard Goetz didn't in any rational way "fight back," but rather, paranoiacally planned his explosion and overreacted to a marginal threat. He's no role model.

Re: Bad example

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

That's the media's misinterpretation of events.

Re: Bad example

[qnetter]

And you have the gospel on this how?

[holzman.livejournal.com]

Electronics repair geek Bernard Getz shooting punks on a NY subway car in self-defense,

I suspect I'm gonna pick this nit until I die: Goetz did not shoot in self defense. No threat had been made, no weapon had been brandished, and walking up to someone who's already down, saying "You don't look so tough, here's another," and shooting him again is damn sure nothing but attempted murder.

Goetz should be doing life in prison, the only reason he isn't is that he's a White guy who shot Black guys, and you undercut your position by validating that.