Is There A Difference Between Democrats And Republicans? If You Live In Missouri And Think So, Please Let Robin Carnahan Know

ummm...

When I started writing yesterday's post about the Missouri Senate race, I was almost elated over how really skillfully the Democratic nominee, Secretary of State Robin Carnihan, had gone after one of the most corrupt members of Congress, her opponent Roy Blunt. The 30 second ad is just spectacular. Here, watch it again (since it doesn't only refer to Blunt, but to the other Wall Street darlings who took boatloads of bribes from Wall Street and then helped engineer Bush's no-strings-attached Wall Street bailout, the biggest heist of taxpayer dollars in history (not counting war). So watch Blunt squirm but, remember, the ad could as easily be about almost any of the GOP congressional leaders John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan, Pete Sessions, Chuck Grassley, Richard Burr, Mark Kirk (being financed today by Wall Street in a bid for the Illinois Senate seat), Mike Castle (being financed today by Wall Street in a bid for the Delaware Senate seat), Mary Fallin (being financed today by Wall Street in a bid for the Oklahoma governor's mansion), or nearly the entire California Republican congressional delegation, including crooks like Jerry Lewis, Ken Calvert, John Campbell, David Dreier, Mary Bono Mack, Dan Lungren, Buck McKeon, Gary Miller and Wally Herger.



Wouldn't it have been nice to have been able to just end it there? But, alas, I couldn't. I couldn't because right after putting out a picture perfect populist message like that, the clueless Carnahan-- who must be getting advice from Claire McCaskill-- then announced she's on the same page as Blunt and other shameless Wall Street shills in trying to give multimillionaires another huge and unfair tax break. Not even Wall Street's reps in the White House, Rahm Emanuel, Tiny Tim Geithner and Lawrence Summers, and the president's loudest anti-populist advisor, Robert Rubin, could talk Obama into that untenable position, regardless of how shrill the demands by the ruling elite. A new CNN poll just out shows that ordinary voters DO NOT WANT MORE TAX BREAKS FOR MILLIONAIRES. The poll didn't ask about favorability of mounting millionaires' heads on pikes in town squares but if it did, I think Carnahan might be in for quite the surprise.

The poll shows that 51% support Democrats’ plans-- real Democrats, not the Carnahan version-- to end the Bush giveaways to the rich, while keeping in place tax cuts for those making less than $250,000. A mere 31% support expanding the budget-busting tax giveaways for the rich, while 18% believe all of the Bush tax cuts should come to an end. So 69% want tax breaks for the rich to end. Even most Republican voters think the wealthy have had their tax breaks long enough! Carnahan made a really bad political blunder. That's why I wasn't surprised to read TomP's diary at Kos yesterday, Bye, bye Carnahan. No More $$$ From Me. Of course, he'll vote for her-- she's infinitely better than the crooked Blunt-- but no more campaign contributions.

This is a step too far. By supporting tax cuts for the rich, ones her mother voted for in the Senate, Robin turned her back on working people.

I only have so much money and I need to put it where it will do the most good. Robin's fighting for a Republican seat, and she'll be an upgrade, but Alexi will be a progressive voice who will not only support the President's agenda, but push him to the left. Robin clearly has decided to take a blue dog path.

You can't be an economic populist and support tax cuts for the rich.
 
...She took the blue dog road and I'm getting off here.

At a time when Democrats, Independents and most Americans are craving a strong, coherent populist message, why do we have Democrats presenting themselves as shills for the two or three hundred richest families in America? Isn't that why we have a Republican Party? And isn't that why the Republican Party was voted out of power?