« 2006: Throw the Bums Out | Main | July 19 - Blogosphere Day »
Monday, August 22, 2005
Deus ex Machina
Posted by Bob BrighamSenator Russ Feingold descends upon center stage:
[Democrats] could have won that election in 2002. We were way ahead on domestic issues, but the Democratic Party and Democratic leaders decided to take a pass on the Iraq war. They decided to defer to the President, and I have to tell you many Democratic leaders knew better. This was a bad idea, but they allowed the Bush administration to brilliantly intimidate them into not standing up and saying this doesn't fit in with the fight against Al Qaeda and the terrorists that attacked this country on 9/11. Of course, I didn't buy into this and I voted no, but I was even in the minority among Democrats in the Senate. And now were making the same mistake, now that it's clear that the administration took us into Iraq under false premises. We have a situation where they are doing a terrible job managing this war. They are doing a terrible job of having a plan to win the war and win the peace. Yet, Democrats are allowing the President to set the terms of the debate. If somebody says "what about a plan to bring the troops home", the President labels it cut and run. Democrats have become silent, so I do think perhaps that we have allowed this to become a taboo. My purpose this week is to break that taboo, let other Democrats know it's safe to go in the water. It's safe to talk about how we can succeed and bring our troops home. Why shouldn't we Democrats be talking about that?
The DLC forget to tell the good Senator that he can't talk about success.
I believe we lost in 2000, 2002, 2004 because we are not taking a progressive approach. Were trying to be Republican lite and so I think a strong, progressive message that gives the country a real alternative is the way to go. But, it shouldn't be a rigid one, for example John McCain and I came together on McCain-Feingold. He is a conservative, I am a progressive, but we agreed that the unlimited contributions to the process were a corrupting influence. So, you can label that whatever kind of idea you want, it's just a good idea. Progressives should be open to those kinds of ideas and what I am concerned about is the tendency of some in the party to think that by being a little less conservative than the Republicans that they can get elected. Harry Truman said they will just vote for the real thing.
We need to give people a real choice in 2006. In every precinct in every district in every state.
I decided that we have to have a 50 state strategy for Democrats. I have already been to several red states, Alabama, Florida, and Tennessee in order to try and connect with progressives and Democrats who really are there and are already at work. They just were so grateful that somebody, who seems to be part of the national Democratic Party, would care enough to come and see them. You know, when I came to United States Senate there were two Senators from Alabama and two from Tennessee, and now there are none. These are states which are perfectly capable of electing Democrats, but we need to get out there and help.
Indeed.
Posted at 07:59 PM in Democrats | Technorati
Comments
Who said it?
What Does The Base Want?
By Matthew Yglesias | bio
Who said it?
The White House has been painting a rosy picture and people aren’t buying it anymore. We all know the outcome is uncertain and there is no exit date. But even now, too many conservatives just want to applaud whatever the administration does. And too many liberals who opposed the war want to see the president’s Iraq policy fail. . . .
The good news is we can successfully exit Iraq once the roughly 140,000 Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) are adequately trained and skilled enough to defend their fledgling government.
No matter what your position on the war, if we pull out now the entire region will spiral into chaos and present our nation and military with a far more difficult challenge than we currently face. I don’t relish the prospect of my two sons going over there in twenty years. We need to get it right, and we need to do it now.
Joe Biden? Hillary Clinton? Will Marshall?
Aug 22, 2005 -- 05:12:42 PM EST
Nope, that was the blogosphere's boy, Mr. Paul Hackett himself. Now, needless to say, I think Hackett's wrong. Also needless to say, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that Democrats would want to nominate people who are more conservative than me for races in Ohio. But this puts an interesting perspective on Mike Crowley's post on Hackett over at the other TPM:
But a Hackett Senate bid would channel the same intraparty tensions discussed below. Many Democrats feel Hackett was too anti-Bush for his own good, that his blazing rhetoric may have scared off some war-weary Republicans who nevertheless respect the president. Needless to say, Hackett's liberal champions don't buy that. So if party consultants convince Hackett to hold back on the Bush-bashing in a Senate race, his liberal-blog-fueled fundraising could dry up fast. But Hackett's a cocksure, shoot-from-the-hip kind of guy -- he even lapsed into a Robert De Niro "Are you talkin' to me?" imitation during his House concession speech -- and it's not clear anyone can tell him what to say in the first place.
That would be an unfortunate outcome. As Kenny says Democrats should be having a debate about the substance of policy, now how to talk about George W. Bush. My main critique of the netroots would be that I sense a large degree of willingness to elevate shrill rhetoric over actual policy. Dick Gephardt, having done more than any other member of the Democratic Party to land the country in Iraq, was able to recapture the hearts of many bloggers by calling Bush a "miserable failure."
It warmed my heart to hear that line, too, just as I thrilled to Hackett's Bush-bashing. But I'd much rather live with a moderate tone and an an anti-war policy than live with the reverse. Liberals need to be clear about what our priorities are.
Posted by: John McCutchen at August 22, 2005 08:34 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
And Who Said THIS?
Both the neocon Right and the "centrist" (i.e., left-neocon) Democratic Leadership Council denounce the antiwar movement – and any timetable for withdrawal – as "anti-American," but how "pro-American" is the regime we've installed in Iraq by force of arms? When you look at what we've actually done in Iraq – the emerging Islamist-Kurdish tyranny we've empowered – it turns out that the U.S. government is the biggest exponent – and exporter – of true anti-Americanism. The irony and tragedy of this seems lost on those for whom "anti-American" is the main epithet in their rhetorical arsenal.
The Bushies and their Democratic enablers see only what they want to see, and blame the "MSM" for perpetrating a supposedly false idea of what is really going on in Iraq. But who cares if Americans are building schools and ensuring elections when the former become fundamentalist indoctrination centers and the latter enshrine mob rule and religious fanaticism as the law of the land?
As Shi'ite party militias roam the ruins of Iraq's cities killing and beating political dissidents, and whipping women who fail to wear the requisite head-to-toe chador, our "democracy"-crazed neocons cite the country as a "model" – and look forward to the "liberation" of the rest of the Middle East along similar lines. The world seen through the prism of neoconservatism is truly a Bizarro World, where everything is stood on its head, not just physical laws but also traditional moral precepts as well as the rules of logic.
CA District 8 GOP Candidate for Congress - 1996
When your Democratic "Leader" asks for your vote...
Take it from this 33 year Rabid Yeller Dog..
Demand more than an oxymoron in return
Posted by: John McCutchen at August 22, 2005 08:38 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment
"a href=" doesn't work here...Lord
Yglesias http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/8/22/134529/932
antiwar.com
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=7034
Posted by: John McCutchen at August 22, 2005 08:49 PM | Permalink | Edit Comment | Delete Comment