In a scathing rebuke to his own party, Andrew Cuomo is charging that Democrats are "lost in time," often appear "bloodless, soulless and clueless," and have "fumbled" their role in the post-9/11 world.
What's more, Cuomo is praising President Bush "for recognizing the challenge of 9/11 and rising to it."
Cuomo's startling observations - which often read like a Republican attack on the Democratic Party - appear in "Crossroads: The Future of American Politics," a just-published Random House book for which the former federal housing secretary and unsuccessful Democratic gubernatorial hopeful served as editor.
"Democrats lost elections in 2000 and 2002 because we were lost in time," wrote Cuomo, son of former Gov. Mario Cuomo, in a 24-page essay.
"We expressed no clear vision for the future. "We had become the party of fear instead of the party of hope - spending more time warning what Republicans would take away rather than we did on what Democrats had to offer," he continued.
As a result, "To voters, we seemed bloodless, soulless and clueless . . . We fooled ourselves into a political strategy of timidity."
Andrew Cuomo, who is weighing another bid for elective office in New York, also said Democrats have "deluded and diluted" themselves into thinking the party's core base - labor, women, and minorities - was strong enough to allow them to recapture control of Congress.
Cuomo's most serious charge was that Democrats "fumbled the seminal moment of our lives - the terrorist attacks of 9/11." Democrats, he said, "have failed to approach the problem with the urgency or comprehensiveness that it demands."
In his essay, Cuomo said Bush "exemplified leadership at a time when America was desperate for a leader."
"He deserves credit, as do congressional Republicans, for recognizing the challenge of 9/11 and rising to it."Meanwhile, on the Democratic side, there was chaos," continued Cuomo, noting, "We handled 9/11 like it was a debate over a highway bill instead of a matter of people's lives."
posted on October 24, 2003 07:42:36 AM new
As I've said before, the American people aren't buying what the Democrats are trying to sell. It's just worded differently.
It supposed to be a government by the people and for the people. If the people don't want what you are offering they will elect someone who will.
It's not that Republicans are always right and the Democrats are always wrong. It's that the Republican way of doing things is the best choice available at the moment. Who really wants to pay for MORE social programs and MORE taxes? No one. Therefore the DEMS are out right now.
Things could switch back, but I don't see it happening in the next two years.
-------------------
Replay Media
Games of all kinds!
posted on October 24, 2003 08:59:15 AM new "Who really wants to pay for MORE social programs and MORE taxes? No one. Therefore the DEMS are out right now."
You don't need to fret and whine about anyone spending money on social programs such as health care, education, poverty or the environment. Dealing with the huge deficit will suck up the U.S. economy for years to come as Iraq remains a problem. The only question is whether the taxes are paid by this generation or future generations.
In the meantime, Bush will cut taxes for the rich while the deficit increases and big bucks are channeled to corporations such as Halliburton.
And to find satisfaction in that scenario, you have to be uninformed.
posted on October 24, 2003 09:32:23 AM new
Billions of dollars have been spent on no bid contracts for major U.S. corporations to rebuild Iraq while troops are without basic protective gear. Why do they not have flack jackets? Why are the Humvees unarmed and inadequate?
posted on October 24, 2003 09:44:42 AM new
OK, for years the feds & state have walked away with almost 30% of my income every year! And here I thought I've been paying taxes. Since I'm not rich, though, that simply can't be the case--since according to many Republicans only the rich are paying taxes in this country and the rest of us are getting a free ride. So where's my money going? What is the government doing with it? I'd like to have it back, please. Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on October 24, 2003 09:54:02 AM new
Currently the business leaders of this country are in the process of outsourcing the jobs you refer to to India, China, Sri Lanka etc. So yes those are the companies/rich being referred to. They avoid paying their fair share or any share of taxes for that matter by moving their headquarters offshore to Bahamian tax havens. Those are definitely the patriots being mentioned.
Excluding my FICA payments 30% of my income is currently taken from me and sent to Haliburton.
Republican, the other white meat!
posted on October 24, 2003 10:12:50 AM new
When I when to Sears yesterday, I found the store almost empty. If people are not buying products, there is no need to increase jobs to make more product. Why would the wealthy increase investment in industry when nobody is buying the product????
Besides the fact that jobs will not be created by the wealthy, the loss of money in the form of tax breaks to the wealthy will affect services which benefit all people...police, fire departments, education, health care etc.
Eventually local taxes will be raised and the people in the lower income brackets will pay.
posted on October 24, 2003 10:16:42 AM new
You are right. Employers have nothing to do with jobs. Only the government can create jobs.
How foolish I was.
Davebraun- WHY do you think all the jobs are going to to India- Because the taxes for these corporations are too high!
Bunnicula- Are you really paying 30% in TAXES? Social Security isn't a tax, it's one of those social programs I was referring to.
The thing is, for every dollar you earn at a regular job, the employer has to pay a certain percentage of taxes above & beyond what you ever see on your check stub. Then they have to pay you enough to cover your share of the taxes plus what you actually take home. Then there is the 40% corporate income tax and the xx% dividend tax.
"Why would the wealthy increase investment in industry when nobody is buying the product???? "
WHY are the people not spending? It's fear over job losses, or an actual lost job, plain and simple. Why are there less jobs? Because there is less money in the corporate coffers and they are tyring to cut costs (See: India). Lower corporate taxes will ease things up on the corporations, which will create security for those who have jobs. Once those people with jobs are secure, they will spend more. This increase in demand, which the will cause the corps to invest in new jobs.
"the loss of money in the form of tax breaks to the wealthy will affect services which benefit all people...police, fire departments, education, health care etc"
How does any of this affect whether or not people buy things at Sears? The quality of my local fire department does never enters my mind when I need a new washer/dryer.
"Eventually local taxes will be raised and the people in the lower income brackets will pay."
Possibly. But who pays more: the man who makes $100,000 and pays 20% in taxes or the man who makes $15,000 and pays 20% in taxes. Sure it's more of a hit to the lower paid (poor) guy, but the higher paid (rich) guy still pays far more.
I know more than a smidgeon of knowledge about the SCIENCE of Economics. It has little do with what is reported by the biased media.
posted on October 24, 2003 10:39:51 AM new
Replaymedia or is it replaygames?
You are having difficulty reading. Maybe it would help to read the comments again in context. I'm not answering silly questions that have no relevance to a serious conversation.
Helen
Ed. to add...
In addition, You need to distinguish one poster's quote from another. In your post above it's not clear.
posted on October 24, 2003 11:27:02 AM new
you will soon find out replay that helen is above answering questions. She feels free to takes posts and start posing off topic hypothetical questions and berates those that don't answer. when the same is done to her she is above that. Truth be know she simply has no answers and has run out of BS.
If you don't believe me just ask linda. That is after all her favorite target to not answer once she starts to loose a debate !
posted on October 24, 2003 11:36:04 AM new
The savings in salaries by going offshore can be as much as 80%. The savings in corporate tax by headquartering offshore can be as much as 90% after the cost of incorporating. Cutting taxes for the wealthy will not and does not create a single job. This administration is the first since Herbert Hoover to show a net loss for jobs during it's watch with 2 years to go.
As an aside yesterday our lawmakers received a raise in pay.
When someone picks my pocket whether they are on the left or the right they are still a thief!
Republican, the other white meat!
posted on October 24, 2003 11:56:24 AM new
Hi, there, tomyou
"Truth be known", the question reminded me of one by Linda.
Corporations are not engaged in altruistic job creation. While they go off shore in search of cheap labor and even import cheap labor Bush is rewarding them with tax cuts.
posted on October 24, 2003 12:51:11 PM new
Ahhhh KD to helen's defense.
KD - Helen always does that, and as recently as two days ago.
posted on October 22, 2003 05:56:56 AM
Right on...LEAVE IT
I'm tired of graciously answering questions which reveal stunning stupidity. It's more fun to be a "bad guy".
posted on October 24, 2003 01:04:52 PM new
replaymedia said: Who really wants to pay for MORE social programs and MORE taxes? No one. Not I. The democrats appear very willing to though.
------------
Each democratic candidate you listen to basically says the same thing: 'this deficit can be lowered by raising taxes'. To me it's like, WOW they think they're going to win on a platform of raising our taxes even more and nominating an anti-war presidental candidate. LOL Unbelievable to me, but that's what I found SO refreshing about Cuomo's statements. His eyes are open.
posted on October 24, 2003 01:10:21 PM new
bunni - since according to many Republicans only the rich are paying taxes in this country and the rest of us are getting a free ride.
I'm not sure which democratic candidate recently said that the reason they would not reverse all Bush's tax cuts was because that would take away approx. $2,000 from a family of four who earned $40,000. It was either Kerry or Dean...I can't recall. So it's not just the republicans who believe there are people receiving more money from these tax cuts.
Have you not seen less money being withheld from your paychecks this year? My son has.
posted on October 24, 2003 01:14:49 PM newCurrently the business leaders of this country are in the process of outsourcing the jobs you refer to to India, China, Sri Lanka etc.
Yes, it is currently happening, but it didn't JUST start occurring. It's been going on for a very long time and, imo, we're seeing the long term affect of it now.
posted on October 24, 2003 01:15:47 PM new
Speaking of debates, I only know a few people here who are good debaters. . Most arguments here either begin with or generate into pissing contests..
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 23, 2003 10:53 PM ]
If you don't believe me just ask linda. That is after all her favorite target to not answer once she starts to loose a debate !