get our newsletter or



Vote for #Greens like @FHerreraD11 to get the revolution started!…

Retweeted 9 hours ago

One of the few advantages of a widely known email address: reading desperate spam from #LittleMarco.

2 days ago

Prop K is almost unrelated to BART. We're also #NoOnK…

2 days ago

Thank you @SFGreenParty for standing up with adult film workers to oppose #Prop60! #NoProp60 #GreenParty…

Retweeted 2 days ago

Thank you to the San Francisco Green Party for endorsing Prop T @SFGreenParty #YesonPropT

Retweeted 2 days ago

Our complete Green Voter Guide, with full explanations for our endorsements, is now online!…

2 days ago

People really watched the #AlSmithDinner tonight? #EamusCatuli

3 days ago

When I heard Hillary say #MiddleOut I just thought of that scene from Silicon Valley 😂

Retweeted 4 days ago

Erich lies about @DrJillStein not fighting Keystone Pipeline, she was arrested for it in 2012-……

Retweeted 5 days ago

@tobiemarx That piece just repeats a lot of baseless Dem talking points. SF Greens support sex workers, e.g. #NoOn60. & wifi, vaccines, etc

5 days ago in reply to tobiemarx


Cat Food Commission is Back

Social Security after ObamaGlenn Greenwald posted a really insightful article today about Obama's continuing attempts to kill off Social Security and Medicare.

While Pelosi and other liberal Democrats have immediately gone into damage control mode, Greenwald points out that although the liberal wing of the Democratic Party will make noise, they will ultimately fall in line, just like those congresspeople who flip-flopped on the mandatory health insurance bill after signing a pledge not to support it.

Greenwald effectively busts the myth of the "spineless Democrat:"

When I first began writing about politics in late 2005, the standard liberal blogosphere critique -- one I naively believed back then -- was that Democrats were capitulating so continuously to the Bush agenda because they "lacked spine" and were inept political strategists: i.e., they found those policies so very offensive but were simply unwilling or unable to resist them.  It became apparent to me that this was little more than a self-soothing conceit: Democrats continuously voted for Bush policies because they were either indifferent to their enactment or actively supported them, and were owned and controlled by the same factions as the GOP.

Greenwald also makes the point that the Democratosphere (e.g., MoveOn, Daily Kos, FDL) will also predictably fall in line after a token protest:

Similarly, those progressive commentators who are first and foremost Democratic loyalists -- who rose up in angry and effective unison (along with actual progressives) to prevent George Bush from privatizing Social Security in 2005 -- will mount no meaningful opposition out of fear of weakening the President's political prospects.

Their ability to neuter opposition to deeply regressive ideas has led other insightful bloggers to conclude that Democrats are worse than Republicans.  While Greenwald doesn't go that far, the results may, unfortunately, speak for themselves.

(We expressed some of the same thoughts in our 2010 Green Voter Guide as well, although not as eloquently as GG.)