Matt Stoller Shares Lessons on Ned Lamont & McCain-Lieberman

-

lamont lieberman.jpg
My good friend, Matt Stoller of MyDD, has scolded me just a bit for some minor swipes I took at the leftish blogosphere. I probably deserved the swat.
Nonetheless, Stoller has an excellent follow-on article to my post about Marshall Wittman and the effort to shape the centrist cosmetics of a McCain-Lieberman 2008 White House run.
He saw this same dynamic in the Lamont-Lieberman Senate race in Connecticut, and what Matt Stoller understands that sizeable chunks of the left-progressive blogosphere don’t is that just saying something is so, over and over and over again, just doesn’t make it so.
We need real strategies with traction — not hyperventilation, and not self-delusion.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

28 comments on “Matt Stoller Shares Lessons on Ned Lamont & McCain-Lieberman

  1. Robert Blandford says:

    Kathleen,
    Why was Lamont’s campaign so bad? Usually the campaign starts bad from the top. Could he not get good campaign staff to sign up?

    Reply

  2. Robert Blandford says:

    “Steve, you wrote, “just saying something is so, over and over and over again, just doesn’t make it so.”
    Well it has for the past six years.”
    That’s right. Mushroom Clouds, Saddam and Al Qaeda. Over and over and over. Easily known to be wrong before the invasion by anyone who read the Washington Post carefully. Not a word before the war about how we have to save the Iraqis.
    Webb and Clark. Sounds like a great ticket.

    Reply

  3. MP says:

    Weldon writes: “Congressional Democrats have done very little during the past six years of what one might expect from an opposition party. Of course what they have done has generally received either scornful or no press coverage, but one of the fundamental purposes of an opposition party is to oppose, and over and over again Democrats either haven’t or have done so ineffectually.”
    Yes, I agree. The Dems have been spineless and twirling around in search of a direction. They are gun-shy and afraid to make a move. That’s what I loved about the Clinton-Wallace exchange: it was a little spark of fire and put Wallace back on his heels for a little bit.
    One thing the Republicans have been VERY good at is tapping into people’s emotions. (Let’s leave aside the rightness or wrongness of these emotions.) They’ve stirred people up. The Dems haven’t been able to do that. Dean started to do it, but he wasn’t smart about it. What would smart have looked like? I’m not sure. But his campaign deflated in about two seconds after that fatal clip and Iowa/NH. There was no real support under it. The support wasn’t deep and strong and wide enough.

    Reply

  4. winnipeger says:

    beautiful; what an amazing mind you have.
    you’re really a class act, poa.

    Reply

  5. Pissed Off American says:

    Hey winnipeger, go fuck yourself. You’re like a God damned gnat.

    Reply

  6. weldon berger says:

    MP: I agree with you. I’m not so much concerned with campaigns, though, as I am with what happens after someone actually wins one. Congressional Democrats have done very little during the past six years of what one might expect from an opposition party. Of course what they have done has generally received either scornful or no press coverage, but one of the fundamental purposes of an opposition party is to oppose, and over and over again Democrats either haven’t or have done so ineffectually.
    You’re right that any proposition will draw fire from someone. That’s why it’s so important to develop easily understood, easily defensible explanations for what you want to do. Democrats have absolutely squandered their six years in the wilderness, in large part because the primary lessons drawn by the dominant wing of the party from the Reagan and Clinton years are that conflict is dangerous and that running slightly to the right of 20th century Republican moderates — corporate-friendly social moderates — is the way to succeed as 21st century Democrats.
    Maybe some of them actually hold to those formless and ever-shifting principles, but the primary argument they make isn’t that these things are good but that they’re necessary to win, an argument I find particularly obnoxious because it hasn’t been accompanied by actual victory until now. And I think most people would agree that this election was more of an assisted suicide than an ideological triumph, although there are elements of the latter.
    I’m not arguing that action alone is the answer, but I think my little mantra of define, defend and advance is a good one providing there’s something to which one can apply it.

    Reply

  7. winnipeger says:

    POA wrote:
    “Okay….my rant is over.”
    do you promise? something tells me no.
    but seriously, POA, if you have so little regard for our host, why do you post incessantly on his blog?
    you wrote:
    “Okay….my rant is over. But hey, watching Fumento on C-Span this morning, it really struck home what deep shit our country is in. If this is the best our country can do, these Fumentos, these Liebermans, these Stollers and these Bush’s, these Clintons and these Clemons these Reids and these Warners, these Coulters these O’Reillys and these Moores and these Limbaughs, the Fox News these C-Spans and these CNNs……”
    i believe that several others have already suggested that you start your own blog. what’s stopping you? it’s easy…

    Reply

  8. Marky says:

    MP, you have a good point about those that implement a policy being the ones to get credit; however, I think the likelihood of Bush or Hillary suggesting to begin withdrawal immediately is near zero. If there were any progress on the ground, they could get away with it, but to leave now, with Iraq falling to pieces, makes them look like sure losers.
    On the other hand, those who thought we never should have gone to Iraq are the ones who can advocate withdrawal now.

    Reply

  9. Kathleen says:

    I am so sick of people like Matt Stoller whining about the Democratic party not helping Lamont. This is NOT true. Lamont lost this election because he ran a totally crappy campaign, flat out. His staff was excruciatingly inexperienced, inept, smug and arrogant.
    I was born and raised in CT, my father’s cousin, Ella Grasso, was Governor of CT, I was on Senator Abe Ribicoff’s staff, so I am very familiar with CT. Democratic politics. I was a Lamont supporter and am very sorry to have to criticize the camapign effort, but their very poor campaign was the reason for the loss.
    They lacked deep research on issues,` They had NO advance work, a really strange attitude toward the MSM in CT and did not involve CT voters in any campaign decisions. In my opinion, the campaign was run like a summer camp, with a bunch of college kids treating CT. voters like little kids. They wanted no ideeas from us, just gave us instructions to phone bank and canvas, all important, but not enough. They left it to the press to check their website to see where lamont was going, instead of sending out press releases and arranging interviews with the candidate.
    Lamont won the primary against Lieberman because Bush’s approval ratings in CT. were the lowest in the nation, 24%. After the primary, Lamont’s campaing manager, Tom Swan, was quoted in the Hartford Courant saying that Dems were calling from all over the country offering to come and camapaign with Lamont but he was going to be “choosey’ about whom he would “let” come. This is smug, arrogant and stupid. Then the campaign went completely dormant for two months, while they waited around because, as Tom Swan told the press, they trusted insiders who were talking to Lieberman about withdrawing. Again, stupid. With or without Lieberman in the race, they had their work cut out for them because surely if Lieberman did withdraw, the Republicans would send in a big gun.
    Even with big name Derms like Teddy Kennedy, John Kerry, Russ Feingold, Hillary Clinton, Maxine Waters, Wes Clark and Howard Dean,John Edeards, Lamopnt’s camapaign staff did not know how to maximize their apppearances in CT. They could not plan a simple event with big Dems. Their idea of what to do with a big name was walk around the streets, shaking hands, willy-milly. No press either. When Maxine Waters came to our Congressional District, we got a message two hours before on a Monday morning when most people are at work. There was not one word in the press about her presence in our district nor were we consulted on where best to bring her. I could go on, but a campaign rife with this kind of ineptitudeis is the real culprit. When you consider that two incumbent Repoublican Congressmen were defeated, you know the support was there, if only they had known how to organize an effective team. Four high priced bloggers does not make a good campaign. They didn’t even reach out to the Democratic Town Committees. They planned no events with the other candidates on the ticket. they acted like Rock Stars and treated voters like dumb little kids, who needed to be told to wear long sleeved shirts and bring bug spray. It wss pathetic.

    Reply

  10. David N says:

    Steve, you wrote, “just saying something is so, over and over and over again, just doesn’t make it so.”
    Well it has for the past six years. That’s the governing philosophy of the fascists who have occupied the White House in that time. The tragedy is, it has worked.
    Yes, the political dialog in this country is broken. This largely the doing of what we gently call the MSM, who have either done their best to dumb down any discullions, or blindly read RNC talking points and pretend it’s journalism.
    Bush has already failed in Iraq. He has broken that country, broken Afghanistan, broken the U.S. military, broken our security system, broken the laws, broken the Constitution, and broken our economy.
    And he will be allowed to claim greatness as a president until he abdicates to Saint McCain, who has already sold out to the Rebublican establishment and been annointed as the next president by the MSM. Then they will blame the Democrats for ‘losing’ Iraq.
    At least we can keep uselessly blogging about this, until they drag us off into ‘detention,’ and leave our loved ones to wonder where we are.

    Reply

  11. Pissed Off American says:

    I just watched some damned fool on C-Span’s Washington Journal by the name of Micheal Fumento blathering on about “pathological Bush haters”, who blame Bush “if they break an ankle”. This fucking idiot is a “contributing editor” at one of the right wing rags, I think it was The Weekly Standard.
    When a caller commented that things would have turned out differently in Iraq if “the American people and the media would have stood behind Bush” this Fumento asshole commented that that that was “slightly optimistic”. At which point he launched into this empty horseshit about “pathological Bush haters”. When the host asked him where he had witnessed such a phenomena, he paused, then cited “un-named relatives”.
    My point? Well, it might just be my increasing age, but has anyone else noticed we seem to have a bunch of unadulterated imbeciles fueling the debate on the current state of the union? What kind of blithering ass can take our current situation and seriously advance some asinine premise like “pathological Bush hatred” as an actual contributing factor to this God damned mess that Administration has inflicted upon our nation? I think there must have been a time when my youth demanded that I respect the position and opinions of my elders. Perhaps I simply never noticed that their opinions or positions were underserving of such respect because their experience, in my mind, superceded the validity of my evaluations. Call it intellectual “insecurity” on my part, if you must.
    But now, as I watch the news daily, or opinion shows such as the one this Fumento embarrassment was showcasing his shallowness on, I am appalled at the absence of quality leadership or opinion displayed by those who are SUPPOSED to be members of the “intellectual elite”. This is true whether it comes from the right, or from the left. This clown Fumento is not an exception, he is, unfortunately, the rule.
    Equally irritating, is these “think-tankers” total reluctance, or inability, to face issues or policy queries head-on. Faced with questions about intellectually indefensible policies or circumstances, such questions are pushed aside with the kind of shallow crap Fumento was spewing this morning, OR, completely ignored.
    And this is true about BOTH sides of the fence. How many of you actually feel ENGAGED here with Steve on these issues? How many times have you seen him advance an opinion, only to ignore the countering opinions, or the queries posed as to the logic of his opinions, and the road that led him to that opinion? I still have absolutely NO IDEA what it is that Reid has done that has demanded Steve’s glowing testimonials about him. I still have absolutely NO IDEA why he laments Harmon’s pandering to AIPAC, yet ignores that same pandering from many of the other Washington figures. I still haven’t a clue what “position” Steve considers Bolton qualified for if the rabid asshole is unqualified for his current seat.
    I realize, of course, that Steve is under no obligation to respond to our queries or opinions. This is HIS blog, and in my opinion, it is one of the better blogs. I wouldn’t post here if it were not so. But on many occassions I see Steve post an opinion about individuals, or about candidatews, or about issues, and when faced with a majority concensus of dissenting views from his readership, he simply moves on, rather than attempting to explain or defend his opinion. Some extremely enlightening and astute posters have fled, (such as Valdren), and it is my opinion that what I describe above has contributed to their flight.
    There seems to be a strong desire here, among Steve’s readers, for an active effort, by our representatives, to hold our government accountable for its actions. Yet here on this blog, and within our media, I see very little mention or support for the efforts of those people who have advocated accountability. I have NEVER seen Kucinich mentioned here, nor Conyers. Yet these two politicians seem to have been advocating the very policy decisions, scope of investigations, and demand for accountability, that I happen to believe a majority of Americans want from their so called “representatives”.
    Everytime the media giftwraps some asshole like Leiberman or McCain for us, the think-tankers, the talk show hosts, and the so called “insiders” such as Steve immediately jump on the marketing campaign, selling us more of the same old snake oil.
    Is anyone else tired of this crap? These bastards in the White House sold us our current situation by…..
    …telling us lies…….
    ….wiping their asses with our constitution…….
    …handing us inept and unqualified people MARKETED by the media and blogs such as this…….
    …and completely ignoring any opinion or policy option that did not parrallel their own.
    Okay….my rant is over. But hey, watching Fumento on C-Span this morning, it really struck home what deep shit our country is in. If this is the best our country can do, these Fumentos, these Liebermans, these Stollers and these Bush’s, these Clintons and these Clemons these Reids and these Warners, these Coulters these O’Reillys and these Moores and these Limbaughs, the Fox News these C-Spans and these CNNs……
    God help us.

    Reply

  12. MP says:

    Michael Lind wrote a short and very interesting book that was entitled something like the Two Texases: LBJ’s and Bush’s. But in it, he talks a lot about FDR and how he created the liberal political environment that most of prize and Bush wants to dismantle.
    He makes the point that the way FDR got the southern Dems to go along with his “socialist” policies was by showing them that those policies were going to bring electricity and indoor plumbing to their states for the first time.

    Reply

  13. MP says:

    Weldon says (very eloquently): “We’re right about damned near everything…”
    To paraphrase an old saying, If we’re so right, how come we ain’t rich?
    I wouldn’t argue with the content of anything you (or POA) say here. Your views are largely mine.
    But still–and I think this is some of the DLC critique–we need to be smarter about it.
    There’s a huge tendency on the left to dismiss opposing views with some version: “If they weren’t being conned by x,y,z, they’d see the light and agree with us.”
    Maybe so–but you have to be savvy about. Doing the right thing alone, IMO, won’t get you elected.
    The reason? There isn’t just one truth out there–like the sun that shines on us all evenly–and all we have to do is get people to look up.
    No. In politics, you’re always goring someone else’s ox. And you have to be ready for him, or have anticipated his move, when he comes after you.
    Ned didn’t do that. Howard didn’t do that. And that’s why they lost. We can complain that they got mau-maued by the press, etc., but politics is a contact sport. And it’s not enough to be right–you also have to be smart and good (at it) to get your way. A mandate is just having a lot more people wanting your way–probaly with lots of trade-offs thrown in–than the other guy’s way.
    That’s what I loved about the Clinton-Wallace exchange: Clinton stuck it to him.

    Reply

  14. MP says:

    Marky said: “Who is the domestic political winner? Not the Republicans, obviously! The winners will be the non-DLC honest Dems, to the horror of Republicans and DLC Dems alike. ”
    Isn’t the winner whoever actually DOES not the ones who first proposed it? The one who does it isn’t going to give credit to first guy thought of it “You see, Dean was right all along,” he/she is going to take all the credit and elaborate it with all the reasons he/she did it at that precise moment with such and such conditions obtaining.

    Reply

  15. liz says:

    I’d like to point out that a house divided falls…. everytime. Bush knows this. Cheney knows this… so do all reps and Senators. They are the most treasonous Americans ever to sit in DC. There are few I trust. I’m tired of being minimized as a leftish blogger. I am an American citizen with all the same rights and priviledges of all Republicans believe it or not. My opinions count too.I am one of many Americans disenfranchised from the American health system due to my disease! The Republicans allow the medical system to stop treating spirochetes just like the ones they stopped treating at Tuskegee! Now they don’t want my two cents worth. Stop abusing me America. Stop giving lip service to equal rights. If we are not still America, someone ought to tell us. I live in third world America, where Republicans think its ok to let Blue Cross Blue Shield sue doctors treating real diseases for fraud…
    The entire world is upside down where I live but again….. stop penalizing me for my views. They are as valid as every other American’s, maybe more so.
    You will all be where I am regarding loss of health care. BCBS wants your money to GIVE meds to Africans.

    Reply

  16. Alex says:

    It is sad that a man held in captivity for over five years would turn into such a warmonger as McCain clearly is. It makes it appear that it is all about revenge and projecting his feelings about the VietCong onto Muslims. Understandable, and he would deny that, but one would think that someone held in captivity would never want to impose that on someone else, unless they just couldn’t control the hatred. Sad.
    I don’t think McCain’s health will hold up for a presidential run.
    BTW Steve, in those pictures downstream, you appear taller than Bill Clinton. He’s 6’4″; how tall are you? 🙂 And, Annie and Oakley are darling. Happy Thanksgiving.
    Alex

    Reply

  17. Carroll says:

    Ditto Weldon also..
    “You want a strategy? Do. The. Right. Thing. Stand up. Quit talking about what Democrats need to do and just frickin’ do it.”

    Reply

  18. Carroll says:

    I ditto POA…and a few others.
    And while Stoller has some points…let’s face it…there isn’t a soul in the dem party leadership or the repub party leadership that wants to, or is capable of doing what Stoller suggest. It just “ain’t” in them. Both parties of political “panders” will ride the status quo see saw of power till the day the banks foreclose on the USA. It’s about “them” not America, never forget that.
    Burn Washington to the Ground and Start Over.

    Reply

  19. Shaneekwa says:

    Stoller is so wrong.
    “CREW, Common Cause, NARAL, etc, these are the groups that failed us totally in Connecticut. I don’t know why.”
    Why? Because Lamont didn’t have a credible position on the #1 issue facing the voters in this very liberal state: war. All of the “adults” could smell defeat coming for months. Some may have hoped that Lamont would grow after the primaries and consult with national security experts to propose pragmatic solutions. But he didn’t. No one in D.C. wants to align with a loser.
    “If we don’t learn the lesson of Connecticut, which is that we must have all hands on deck to change voter impressions about a charismatic media darling with a long relationship to the electorate, …”
    “Charismatic”? Joe Lieberman “charismatic”? Try another explanation – such as smart enough to understand the fears of the pragmatic center of the liberal Connecticut electorate, namely that “withdraw now” is not a solution.

    Reply

  20. weldon berger says:

    “… what Matt Stoller understands that sizeable chunks of the left-progressive blogosphere don’t is that just saying something is so, over and over and over again, just doesn’t make it so.”
    Saying something over and over again actually works quite well over the long term. “Liberal media, liberal media, liberal media.” “Weak on defense, weak on defense, weak on defense.” “Big government, big government, big government.”
    Strategies are made much more effective by effective propaganda. Strategies are made much less effective by the sort of mushy and spineless thinking and behavior that characterizes what are mistakenly described as “centrist” Democrats in the person of the Democratic Leadership Council and others.
    The patronizing and condescending attitudes displayed by DLC types toward Democratic activists who aren’t even, in many instances, particularly liberal, only loud, is not only bad strategy but bad for the country. It’s an effort to preserve Democratic politics as the playground of a Washington elite rather than encouraging the transformation of it into a popular movement that can prevail electorally even on those occasions when Republicans don’t obligingly self-destruct.
    Yes, Democrats need a strategy. But any strategy that doesn’t include the disaffected, hyperventilating, monomaniacal voices that propelled Howard Dean into the DNC chair and helped create an environment in which at least some candidates felt comfortable pressing anti-Iraq war and pro-progressive politics messages despite getting mau-maued by Democratic “leaders,” is ultimately going to fail.
    Instead of wasting your time taking swipes at what is in fact an important and highly motivated Democratic constituency, and instead of grabbing your hanky and hyperventilating about the loud and uncouth crowds, why don’t you spend some time listening to what we have to say and developing a strategy that incorporates it and us. We’re right about Bush, we’re right about taxes, we’re right about health insurance, we’re right about the minimum wage, we’re right about foreign policy, we’re right about fair trade, we’re right about the war, we’re right about Republicans corrupting and looting the government and undermining the Constitution.
    We’re right about damned near everything and if Democratic politicians had defined, defended and advanced those issues instead of running away from them for six years, they would have taken 50 seats in the House and as many as 10 in the Senate because voters would have looked around and seen not only that Republicans are awful but that Jeez, Democrats are right.
    Instead, we had a situation in which Democrats who knew better were intimidated into voting for the AUMF along with Democrats who were too stupid or unimaginative to realize they were being conned. We had Democrats who didn’t even have to be intimidated into supporting ruinous tax cuts. We had Democrats, including the incoming majority leader, voting for the new, extraordinarily punitive and demeaning bankruptcy law, something that will come back and haunt the party during the next two years as the increase in middle-class bankruptcies accelerates.
    You want a strategy? Do. The. Right. Thing. Stand up. Quit talking about what Democrats need to do and just frickin’ do it.
    We need an equitable tax policy. We need national health insurance (both as a matter of fairness and as a matter of corporate competitiveness). We need trade policies that don’t put ethical companies at a competetive disadvantage. We need foreign policies that emphasize our strengths rather than our fears.
    You want a powerhouse Democratic party? Then stop your frickin’ whining and DO THE RIGHT THING.

    Reply

  21. Alex says:

    Barack “Ala” Obama – the “there” ain’t there. He’ll trip up soon.
    As far as a McCain & Lieberman ticket? That will soooo much fun to pick apart. They’re both joined at the hip to Bush, and by 2009, the “Bush drag” will take care of both of them.
    Lamont was abandoned by his party. He won the nomination and the “names” mostly supported Lieberman.
    Next time, Joe won’t have that card up his sleeve.

    Reply

  22. Red Planet (blue sky) says:

    “This is one of the reasons I don’t trust Obama, because he acted like a dependent battered partner and apologized to McCain after McCain viciously attacked him for no particular reason. I see weakness there and moral hollowness, papered over by charisma, brilliance, and ambition.” …Matt Stoller
    I started to comment along these lines in response to your earlier post about Marshall Wittman, which included a mention of how hot Obama currently is, but I couldn’t say it as clearly as I wanted and wound up not commenting. Now comes Matt Stoller who says it perfectly.
    But there’s more I wanted to say…
    In the 1960s my alma mater, a liberal arts college in Arkansas, decided the time had come to integrate. For those who don’t know, integration in those days meant inviting a few select Negroes to join the all white student body. I don’t use the term African-Americans because what the college did was search the world over and offer scholarships to two bright, young Kenyans who had never before been to America. Thus my alma mater, surrounded by a significant population of Southern blacks, was integrated. Locals, descended from slaves, survivors of segregation, tainted by the civil rights movement, need not apply.
    I get the feeling that Democrats fancy Obama for many of the same reasons that Hendrix recruited those two young Kenyans. You see, it wasn’t about them. It was about letting the institution appear to do the right thing without having to actually do the right thing.
    I can understand (if not fully support) why Hendrix College did what it did. The symbolism was important and the sensibilities of its alumni and establishment board of directors wouldn’t allow for more, at that time. But, over time, that first step has led in the right direction.
    Mr. Obama, however, wants to be the President of the United States of America. While an Obama presidency would be symbolically beneficial, symbolism isn’t enough. Whoever Democrats select to occupy that position needs to be intelligent (he is) articulate (he is) politically astute (he may be) to firmly hold progressive values (does he?) and to stand up for them even when the going is tough (the record is not great). So, Obama may be a contender, but not just because he’s handsome, smart, black and so far, politically successful. I want to know much more about the character that underlies that attractive exterior.

    Reply

  23. Marky says:

    I’ll tell you why McCain gets away with murder with his Iraq politics… ahem, I mean figuratively, of course.
    The reason is that the darling DLC Dems who get most of the airtime have done their utmost to sideline Howard Dean, who has been the most prescient, most accurate, and clearest-eyed critic of the Iraq war from the beginning.
    I’ll tell you another danger I see, connected with a lethally cynical political idea.
    While many people are certain that Iraq may slide into civil war if US troops leave, that is not at all certain. We know that the US presence is an irritant, and there is precedent for thinking that once we leave, the level of violence will go down in a rather short time… not immediately or evenly, of course, but perhaps within a couple of years.
    Suppose that by Nov. 2008, the implementation of a troop withdrawal/redeployment is 18 months in the past, and Iraq has stabilized to some extent.
    Who is the domestic political winner? Not the Republicans, obviously! The winners will be the non-DLC honest Dems, to the horror of Republicans and DLC Dems alike.
    This is an outcome that must be avoided AT ALL costs, for McCain and Hillary. No cost is too high to keep the Iraq war from blocking them from their patriotic duty to smarm the public with lies and win the White House.
    You see the logical conclusion of course.
    Immediate troop withdrawal must be opposed by the DC insiders, not because it may fail, but because it may succeed.
    Regardless of whether I am correct about this analysis, there is no question that Hillary, McCain, Obama et. al. are putting the lives of Iraqis and the security of the US in second or third place to their political calcuations.
    I confess that I have not read the Tuchman book which discusses this very phenomenon—how wars are continued because of the desire to save face—but it is clear that is happening here.
    There is no need for another conference on what might be done that might have a positive impact on Iraq, supposing that Bush agreed to the proposal, supposing that the Democrats signed on, and supposing it were implemented without a hitch, and in addition supposing that Bush discovers the Higgs’ boson in his drinking glass. There is no use for the smart men in the room now. We need brave men who will speak the obvious truth about Iraq, without regard to political calcuations.
    I can tell from reading this blog that you cannot find such men at dinner parties in DC, because while they may say such things in private, they lack the courage to repeat them in public.
    The only concrete suggestion I have is that the Dems should promote the views of Murtha, Dean, Feingold, and maybe Clark—I’m just not familiar enough with Clark’s present views.
    Muzzle Hillary, let the attack dogs unrelentingly ridicule Lieberman, and tell Rahm to shut up about foreign policy.
    Not going to happen, of course.

    Reply

  24. km4 says:

    Wes Clark, Jim Webb, and a few others know how to speak and tell the truth and they (the GOP) think it’s hell.
    If Webb teams up with Wes Clark in 2008 then it’s simply going to be a helleva knockout blow to McCain-Lieberman, Guliani/? or whomever the GOP fields on its lame ticket.

    Reply

  25. profmarcus says:

    i’m with pissed off american… as glenn greenwald has rightly pointed out, not just once, but many, many times, the u.s. is in a constitutional crisis with criminals at the helm who, despite the recent elections and ceding both houses of congress to the dems, have made it crystal clear that they are going to keep doing precisely what they goddam well please… that the dems are now seeking to “reform” the passage of the military commissions act that, by their thundering silence, they helped to pass, is nauseating… every public official, elected or otherwise, executive branch, congress, and the courts, who have enabled the bush administration to lead us down this road is wearing the albatross of contravening the united states constitution and being complicit in war crimes… what i DON’T understand is why the seriousness of our situation is not more widely grasped…
    as long as these people are in power and continue to sidestep accountability for their actions, there is nothing else to discuss… anything else is just window-dressing

    Reply

  26. Pissed Off American says:

    We need to hold the framers of this mess accountable for their crimes. Period. And any politician that isn’t working towards that end is complicit in treason. Period. All the rest of this is just the self same horseshit doublespeak and political posturing that has masqueraded as “representation” for far too long.
    Just the mere fact that we could be discussing these two as actual viable candidates is a tremendous statement about how far we have strayed from what we once hoped to be.
    9/10’s of Washington is scum, and the remaining tenth aspire to be. Until someone actually gets on the podium and tells us the TRUTH, our nation will continue its downward spiral. Americans aren’t stupid FOREVER, and you can only scare the common sense out of them for a finite period of time. These bastards badly need another trifecta to march us back onto the Fear Train, or they are exposing themselves to the ire of an ever increasing amount of Americans that are getting just as angry as I am.
    When I see this lying bastard Bush standing on the dock with Cheney, facing charges, than I will once again trust our government, and will have respect for the politicians that pursued their patriotic duty by seeking to restore accountability for our elected officials.
    And it is time for a dose of reality about Iraq, and the various “strategies” these posturing lying bastards are proposing. There IS NO solution to the Iraq debacle. If we stay, or if we leave, the dying is going to escalate. It is now a full fledged civil war. If we stay, we will be forced to kill great amounts of Iraqi citizens. If we leave, then the Iraqis will continue slaughtering themselves along sectarian lines.
    ITS BROKEN. WE BROKE IT. Lets get the hell out of there, TRY to get the Arab countries to intervene, AND INVESTIGATE, INDICT, TRY, and PUNISH these lying bastards in BOTH parties that launched this ill concieved crime.
    If the politicians in Washington, such as McCain or Lieberman, ot Clinton or Obama, or Pelosi or Reid, or Warner, or etc, do not immediately demand that this administration be held accountable for their actions, and that all unconstitutional abuses of power such as the wiretaps, such as torture, such as rendition, such as the suspension of habeas corpus, be immediately discontinued, than they are no better, no more honest, no more patriotic, than these criminals in the White House.

    Reply

  27. della Rovere says:

    I do not know too much about Republican centrism since there haven’t been so many visible examples of this in the last decade or so. McCain coughs during Republican talking points and the pundits hear an independent voice.
    Democratic centrism in the face of Republican extremism has functionned (think of the Great Filibuster Victory) to confirm Republican policies. Point in case: Bullwinkle Moose and Holy Joe.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *