Skip to content

One more reason I won’t give to the DNC, DCCC, or DSCC

As most politically aware Democrats know, there will be a primary in late August to decide the Democratic nominee for the United States Senate. Alan Grayson is one candidate. Lord knows he’s not perfect (well, actually there is no Lord), but at least he’s an actual Democrat, something that can only technically be said about his opponent, Patrick Murphy. What many politically aware Democrats might not know is that the DSCC has picked sides in this race, and is spending a million dollars to run ads on behalf of one of the candidates..

Do I have to tell you which candidate is on the beneficiary of this largesse?

As in Maryland, where the DSCC also went for the DINO, President Obama is helping out, assuring the people in Florida that Patrick Murphy has “had his back” while “serving” in Congress. Murphy has a strange way of having Obama’s back:

This nonsensical ad with Obama’s voice claims Murphy has had his back in the House. The only thing Murphy did with Obama’s back in the House was to stick knives in it. He was one of only a tiny handful of Democrats (all from the New Dem Republican wing of the party) to have not just voted for the Keystone XL Pipeline every time it came up but to vote for the disgraceful and unconstitutional GOP scheme to remove Obama from the decision-making process! Is that having his back? Grayson, coincidentally, was the congressman who began court proceedings to defend Obama’s authority in the matter!

But that was just one of scores of examples of Murphy stabbing Obama in the back. Can you imagine a Democrat voting with the Republicans to establish the Benghazi witch hunt against Hillary Clinton? That was Patrick Murphy. The only other Democrats still in the House who voted for the establishment of the Benghazi Committee are two ultra-reactionary Blue Dogs, Kyrsten Sinema (AZ) and Collin Peterson (MN)– just those two proto-Republicans and Murphy.

And then there’s Obama’s back in terms of Dodd-Frank. There is no House Democrat who’s worked more diligently– if not all that effectively, given his lack of talent– on behalf of the banksters than Patrick Murphy. He is the go-to chump among House Financial Services Committee memberswhen they need a patsy to make their pro-bankster legislation appear “bipartisan” by adding a Democratic schnook as a co-sponsor. Ironically, it wasn’t #DebtTrapDebbie Wasserman Schultz who co-sponsored the pay day lending scheme, it was Patrick Murphy, who has taken more money from the payday lenders than anyone else running for the Senate. In fact– at $1,413,950 and counting– Murphy has taken more money this cycle from the Finance Sector than any non-incumbent running for the Senate. The banksters have given him more loot than they’ve given to vulnerable Republican incumbents who have been serving their interests in the Senate already, like Ron Johnson (R-WI), Mark Kirk (R-IL), Richard Burr (R-NC), John McCain (R-AZ) and Roy Blunt (R-MO)– and nearly double what they’ve given any other non-incumbent from either party.

via Down with Tyranny

You would be hard pressed to find an issue on which Murphy has actually had “Obama’s back”. Which leads to a rather simple question. Why is Obama, not to mention the DSCC, doing this to a Democrat who has, consistently, and not just on rare occasions, had Obama’s back? Sadly, the answer is obvious. What Wall Street wants, Wall Street gets, at least to the maximum extent that the party establishment can possibly give.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.