Login Here
I am extraordinarily tired of this piece of conventional wisdom, contained in today's New York Times article on presidential hopefuls and Lamont:
Given Mr. Lieberman’s promise to continue caucusing with the Democrats, the outcome will hardly tip the balance of power in the Senate.
Oh please. When people get cynical about reading newspapers it is because of bullshit like this that only gets peddled for the masses, public kabuki that nobody really believes -- behind the scenes I don't know anyone who doesn't acknowledge that the deal Lieberman struck with Karl Rove for all his support (Dan Senor, keeping Schlessinger in the race, the services of Rush Limbaugh and the Mighty Wurlizer) has him agreeing to caucus with the GOP if the Senate winds up in a 50/50 tie. And anyone who doubts him capable of it should only look at the threats he issued to his fellow party members only weeks ago, or the way he punked Harry Reid and Hillary Clinton when he got their endorsements by promising not to leave the party. Look how well that one worked out.
The article goes on to note that support for Lamont within the party is coming from 2008 hopefuls who don't want to alienate his grass roots supporters, but that people like Mark Warner are trying to hedge their bets:
Some of the White House hopefuls — most notably Mark R. Warner, the former governor of Virginia — are debating how strongly to align themselves with a candidate who has become an icon of the liberal left.
[]
At least one candidate, Mr. Warner — who made his fortune in technology and is courting the blogosphere in other ways — has largely avoided Mr. Lamont, instead lending his name and fund-raising capabilities to races that are genuinely in play and have longer-term strategic value for the Democratic Party, like Representative Harold Ford Jr.’s bid for the Senate in Tennessee.
Really? That was an awfully big show Warner put on at Yearly Kos. For someone who clearly wants to woo the blogosphere, it seems awfully short-sighted. In case anyone hasn't noticed, we care quite a bit about this race, pretty much across the board.
All I can say is -- if you don't want to show up now, that's fine. Don't come begging with your hat in your hand come 2008.
Share This 
Spotlight
Jane!
glad you got to visit SF in our beautiful weather window - hope you and Kobe and all had a good visit….
jane,
you got that right. the time for courage by guys like warner is now. doing the right thing when it is not safe or convenient is the true test of character.
fitz
Olbermann!
That’s what I get for reading the post. I’m seeing him tonight and will try to get a read.
Warner can’t take a position on Iraq. He speaks with forked tongue. Talks beltway to the beltway and blog to the bloggers. I wouldn’t trust him. Latest thing is his double shuffle on the Bush tax cuts.
Hey, Warner, don’t let the door hit you on the way out of the primaries.
Great job yesterday, Jane.
You sounded and LOOKED great. :)
larry johnson @
2
Yep, we’ll be watching.
Good to see you round, Larry.
egregious @
5
Let us know, egregious.
i am not sure that folk in connecticut really care about what the beltway folk think. at least not the folk i run into. it is my humble opinion that we may actually like someone to represent us for a change, so support from warner or hill or schumer would be nice but i am not looking for it and would rather they stay out of the nutmeg state. i am hoping to get some tickets to the debate.
EPU’d ,
more relevant here anyway.
OT,
I was home in bed all day yesterday sick.
I just caught up to Jane on KO.
Wow,so articulate.And after seeing so many comments on her looks, I have one thing to say.
My, Jane, what beautiful eyes you have.
(My best feature, I’m told also.)
Why does anyone trust Lieberman to caucus with the Dems? Is it because of his dishonorable treatment of the party leaders to whom he pledged no indy run? Is it because of his strategic absences from Senate votes on issues at the center of the Democratic agenda? Is it because of his inability to support Connecticut congressional candidates with a real chance to shift control of the lower House? Is it because he catapults the BushCo propaganda in any media outlet that’ll have him, providing “bipartisan” cover to the warmongers and profiteers?
If victorious in November (shudder) Lieberman will have no reason to honor any commitment to Democratic party leaders, if he’s even made one (which I doubt). Why this seat appears “safely in Democratic hands” is beyond me.
And, yes Jane, while the Warner sushi may be enticing and while I appreciate Warner’s efforts for Senate Democrats elsewhere, NED is the litmus test for progressive support in 2008. If a candidate didn’t raise money and appear in Connecticut for NED in 2006, there’s no need to seek my support in 2008.
============
Had Enough?
============
No matter what Warner says, I think that Lieberman is in deep thoughts
Lieberman/Lamont/Scheslinger debate has been scheduled!
You know, the right wing bloggers would also get a lot of support from liberals and their own party if they would just start kissing some ass on their side. Can you imagine how great things could be if we could each keep a handful of elected officials and wipe the slate with all of the rest of them?
Honestly, what good does it do the “right” to keep backing their crooked leaders? Does it all come down to just admitting that they were wrong? It hasn’t been easy for those on the left to weed out the “bad seeds”. But unless we weed out the selfish senators from BOTH sides (starting to sound like Chauncey Gardner here)and carefully select a whole new seed to harvest throughout all our “fields”, how will we ever achieve a master crop that we can all live with?
“You must tend to the garden, plant in the spring and harvest in the fall. In the winter, the garden dies and you must wait for spring.”
–Chauncey Gardner, Being There
Other than throwing money around and making a big party splash at YKos, I didn’t find anything at all impressive about Warner.
Let him spend his money. He can’t buy us, no one can. Warner struck me as the usual beltway kind of guy who tells every audience what he thinks they want to hear, but doesn’t bother to listen to them to find out what they need.
Yes, Ned is the litmus test. He stands for what we care about and he does so honestly and openly. More of that please.
hmmm, has joe himself been pressed about this issue lately. i know he claimed in the past to be loyal to the dems, but as you said, we see how much that has meant to him. i’d actually like to see him be forced to keep repeating over and over that he promises to caucus with them if elected. joe is trying to be both rebublican and democrat, and i think the voters deserve to know exactly what color that coat is.
A spider and a turtle are standing by the side of a stream. The spider says to the turtle, “put me on your back and carry us across the stream.” The turtle replies “no way, you’ll bite me and I’ll drown.” The spider say “no I promise I won’t.”
So the turtle lets the spider climb on and halfway across the strea, the spider bites him. The turtle starts to go under and says “what did you do that for?” The spider replies,”I can’t help it, it’s my nature.”
Joe Lieberman has been screwing his party for 18 years. It’s in his nature.
If I had to choose today, it would be next to impossible for me to support Warner’s presidential bid. I won’t forget the NYT Sunday Magazine article on him from a few months back. He was invited to a dinner with some interested Dems and, after having been lobbed a question regarding his less-than-forthcoming support for reproductive choice, he followed the questioner out to her car afterwards, screaming at her (paraphrase) “That’s why people can’t stand the Democratic party! You keep harping on the choice issue!”
Yep. And I, for one, am gonna keep harping on it, and keep harping on it, until I get the answer I like, with proof of commitment to it attached. But presidential hopefuls throwing tantrums because we women care about our rights… well, let’s just say, that kind of thing doesn’t make me feel too warm and fuzzy.
oops! Meant to say kicking some ass in the second line @16.
Interesting how close to election day the dabate is. I hope they (moderators) don’t let Lieberloser run amuck this time.
Joe and his amazing technicolor turncoat.
Given that the Warner paragraphs have no quotes and no sources, I’m not inclined to assume it’s above the general BS level of the rest of the article. It notes that Warner’s PAC has given the maximum amount to Ned, and quotes Lamont and his staff saying that they want to be selective about what out-of-staters appear with him.
Remember, Ned could finance the whole campaign himself if he wanted to. He’s fundraising in part to show that he’s supported by the grassroots and not beholden to big-money interests. High-dollar fundraisers with 2008 hopefuls wouldn’t exactly support that.
So far this month 50 American soldiers have died in Iraq. Incredibly it does not lead the news every night. Why? Because, we have failed to push it with the single minded fervor such a horrible tragedy deserves. It is the bitter fruit of the greatest strategic blunder in America’s history.
Every second we spend talking about something other than this is a victory for Rove and Co.
He underdstands this. Do we?
ccmask @ 16
“I like to watch,” Chauncey Gardner. :)
What did you make of the ending where he walked on water? I thought at the time it was an analogy for being able to do anything if you didn’t know it was impossible.
Pssst. Redshift. how’s the missus?
Rawstory has a piece about Iran war planning. Could this be Rove’s October surprise?
Eureka Springs, AR @ 22
Well it’s George Stephanopolous. He seems pretty capable and less likely to be dumb-struck by a petulant, gum-flapping, over-talking Lieberman as the previous mod was.
Twisted,
You are right. It’s in his nature. But also, to get where he is and hopes to be, HoJo has sold his soul (if he had one) to the Bush Crime family. IF he wins, they will own him.
Sharon: I never really thought about the walking on water part but what a delight that flick was is so many ways. He was in such a better place than all the politicians were.
Lieberman must have something up his sleeve…
TeddySanFran @ 1:38 pm (#13)
I’ve written for months, both here and elsewhere, that assuming that Lieberman would join the Democratic Caucus should he win as an independent was a fool’s bet. He’ll do it if he thinks it’s in his interests, and if not he’ll drop the DC like a bad habit. His behavior since then has given me no cause to re-evaluate that position.
I’m not making support of Lamont a litmus test, but if not supporting him is part of a pattern of none-too-progressive behavior, then that candidate needn’t look to me for help. That’s already the case with Warner, unfortunately.
I am really getting alittle tired of Medina. It was nice that she noted that Dangerstein lied over at Empire Zone, but it still doesn’t make up for her constant cheerleading of Joe.
She has the sensibility of a Michelle Malkin; and the intelligence of a Fox news show host.
old gold @ 25
Chris Matthews was on Imus and said the war in Iraw was “BULLSHIT”. Gotta love that, and he said the same thing you did. Here is a link via Think Progress.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/.....ainst-war/
sorry for spelling errors… anyway I always like to encourage (via emails) MSM people when they call Bush and Rove and co out on their BS.
Even if they are otherwise twits and/or egomaniacs.
I fully understand the need for the netroots and progressives to align themselves with Democrats, but until there is a strong, progressive third party in this country, nothing will get done. The supposed battle between Democrats and Republicans is mostly for show and contrary to what people say about the effect of Jon Stewart, serves to create not only cynicism, but more importantly, apathy. This apathy keeps the status quo for the political elites.
Why can’t we get progressives to split off of the Democrats and create a true party of the people and let people like Joe Lieberman have their Democratic party? I think we are being short-sighted in placing our eggs in the Democratic basket instead of the long-term strategy of building up a strong, principled, non-corporate dominated party for the sake of our children and theirs. Some might say that the Republicans are so bad that we need to get in with the Democrats in order to get this ship of state back on course, but the longer we wait, the longer it’s gonna take.
ccmask @ 31
For me that was one of those rare gem finds on TV that you never expect. I had never even heard of it and was so taken with it as it operated on so many different levels. It’s a real Peter Sellers classic.
I’ve since seen it like three times more on TV. I suppose one day I ought to rent the movie and see if they cut anything out for TV.
Regarding the walk on the water, I thought it was supposed to be very significant. The director made of point of him showing the water’s depth by sticking his umbrella down into it (or was it a stick?) and even after noting that his umbrella sinks way down, he walks on because it not significant to him other than as an observation. He makes no mental connection that because one object sinks that he should as well. He walks on water only because he doesn’t know it is impossible much the way he gained status and fame and fortune. Although in both areas he wasn’t trying to achieve anything great either. :)
“Bush, GOP rebels said to be near accord” (on the terror interrogation legislation; McCain, Warner, Graham). What a bunch of hogwash.
This is just the usual GOP cheap and dirty election year trick.
Graham says we will win the Iraq War “because we are better than they are”. Qualitatively speaking. Of course. The Republican party is the party of racists and bigots. Naturally, this is not new news.
Note to Warner:
I’m just a regular Joe with a long memory. I’ll be over here watching from the tall grass.
RevDeb @
17
Um, I am taking offers…..
Note to Jane:
Just saw your bit on K.O. You done good girl.
What does that mean?
“Genuinely in play.” “Longer-term strategic value.” ?????
If these guys think that we’re just going to sit here and keep electing the same old lame ass triangulators that we’ve had quite enough of already, they need to take a deep breath. Hollow hand-shaking and money-driven campaign bon mots are not going to cut it. Guys like Warner are roadkill.
haggle, haggle.
Just a little point as I run to the train — if the Senate ends up 50/50, Lieberman does not need to caucus with the Republicans because the tie breaking vote regarding leader would be settled by Cheney.
Lieberman is more useful to the Republicans as a Democrat, annyway.
Question — has anyone figured out if (as Digby always predicted) there actually has been a Senate compromise of the torture bill?
If so, what is it?
Waded through all of my emails. My stomach is soured the news is all so bad. Our government is so crooked, these guys are probably hiring.
Quote from Babs:
“That’s my son, I raised him on Milk of Magnesia, ain’t he the shits?”
I missed Warner in Vegas. Was he gladhanding bloggers? It must be a tough thing to do when you don’t kbow any of them. Ambassador Wilson even accidentally shook my hand.
Lieberman’s timing was awful. Just as we are getting ready to take over the joint, he openly campaigns with the Republicans. And as for Chris Matthews, that bastid has some nerve not opening his big mouth more wrt the war. Imagine having an hour of airtime on tv every night and wasting it on people like Coulter and O’Bierne. I have no respect for him at all. He’s just another one of those on the weenie circuit. Let’s see Matthews embellish on the fact that 50 soldiers have died this month, according to oldgold@25. I remember during Vietnam they always had the death count displayed for all to see, along with the tipping of hats to coffins arriving nightly.
TeddySanFran–
I completely agree with this. Support for Lamont is the litmus test.
The CW Jane writes about assumes that JL will be part of the Demo caucus; Jane thinks this assumption is delusional. But the point is, on matters that most of us care about, even if JL were to caucus with the Dems, the country would lose.
IMO, the two most important questions for the next Senator from Connecticut (or anywhere else) relate to how he/she will vote on the following two questions:
(1) Will you support or oppose the President’s policies that are moving inexorably towards another senseless, bloody war in Iran? Is there any doubt where Joe Lieberman winds up on this question?
(2) Will you support or strongly oppose the President’s radical judicial appointments, including a potential next appointment to the Supreme Court? Joe’s failure to support the Alito filibuster and his membership in the gang of 14 tells us that he, in effect, is a likely vote for the further radicalization of our courts, to the detriment of the rule of law and the Constitution’s protections.
These are the policy litmus tests for me, and I have no doubt that Joe Lieberman will function like another Republican on these two important issues, even if he nominally caucuses with the Dems.
So Jane may be right about what he intends to do, and her track record is pretty good; or she may be wrong, but even if she’s wrong, leaders in the Democratic party should approach the Lamont/Lieberman choice assuming she’s right.
Thanks for the info on the Debate on 10-23rd.
A separate thread of issues that Ned should bring up and stress would be a nice feature here ! Naturally, as Joe is trying not to talk about Iraq, then Iraq should be brought up a lot by Ned. I believe Schlesinger thinks it is a disaster, too, so it would be great!
Joe’s missed votes. Someway to bring up the Alito vote in a way to make Ct. residents Understand exactly what Alito on the court means ! Only NE Dem to vote for Energy bill and what that means to us.
Oh, and of course, every single Republican in the state is trying to take credit for Groton sub base, and the “31,000″ jobs saved! Let’s expose that, too.
I see Digby drinks Soy Latte’s. I’m gonna have’ta try one. I’ve been sworn to secrecy about others who may or may not enjoy this obviously flaming liberal concoction.
Lest we forget:
Read the whole article here
Sorry…preview isn’t working. Hope the link works.
TSF,
wrt Ned support from other Democrats–to turn a phrase of Dubya, you are either at the table or on the menu.
Face it, Joe is a whore. If he can pull off a victory, he will feel beholden to no one, and have a sense of invincability. His vote will always go to the benefit of Joe, the party of one.
meta @ 43
I like the vernacular “lame ass triangulators”.
Would this include La Hill? Queen of the lame-ass triangulators on Iraq and the Palestinian “question”.
I just want to thank all these crazies making political statements as the rightful representatives of their respective candidates, those of you masters of punditry that appear regularly on the teevee newz shows that lean a bit to the right.
you are making so much great material for the comedians out there. truthylies, the great underbelly of overthetop, just wonderful. It would seem that we will have new routines and shows and parodies and lampoon’s that should go on and on until the prison terms start in earnest. (sorry ernie)
Let’s look forward to our new election cycle line up;
“caucus with the cockout”
“back door politics in the real world”
“the acceptance speech” or (he’s my girlfriend, bitch)
“low security circle jerk”
“white collar criminals, multicultural games”
please, help me with more likely titles. Some of the 2200 investigations into public corruption might just be well known public figures.
thank you, Richard Potato ( dicktater)
Another likely title:
“Bennet or Broke it?”
1,266 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ IT GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
FDLers:
Let’s get real here, any Democrat who really wants ANY real support from progressives in ‘08 will get their ass down ta Connectecutt and give Lieberman a big shove under the bus. Are you listening Hilary??!!
There has been a murmurin’ thru the beltway for a couple a months that it would be better if the Dems DIDN’T take back both houses of congress because…(are you ready for this?)…then the Democrats would be responsible for DOIN’ sompthin about the shit we’re in and wouldn’t be able ta blame the mess in ‘08 on the fascists!!
I been workin the last few weeks for a local Democratic assembly candidate and I’m here to tell ya that out here in the boondocks, in the tundra not too far from the “big city”, anything labeled “Republican” is poison. The disconnect between the DC beltway wisemen and the reality on the ground is astounding. I can’t believe that Lamont doesn’t have Connectecutt all locked up…things are gettin real goofy, the world I see on the Tube and read about in the corporate media might be in this solar system but it ain’t on this planet.
The work that the DNC organizers are doin’ in this state is outstandin’…why aren’t we seein’ the national party on the attack everywhere?
KEEP THE FAITH, IT JUST GETS STRANGER AND STRANGER!!
Oilfieldguy @ 52
OFG, a lot worse things can happen to you. I think!
Mommybrain @ 27
She’s doing okay. She’s doing better than she usually does after surgery, in my opinion, but she’s still hurting and feeling pretty run down. We don’t have the results yet, of course, and she has to go back in next week because they couldn’t do everything in one day.
She remains a good liberal, though — she said when she was told “we have to get you in for tests as soon as possible,” one of the first things she thought was “y’know, if we didn’t have good insurance, I’d be screwed.”
Oklahoma kiddo @ 55
OKkiddo, am I that transparent?? heh.
I think Lamont has it pretty tied up. I can’t believe the polls anymore. To me, the polls are there to help reflect diebold.
Regurgitated from last thread:
So, Mel Sembler’s fundraising for Holy Joe, now?
Cute. Real cute.
got a chance to watch Jane on KO last night and showed the clip to a colleague this morning who had never heard of Jane or fdl. His imression was interesting, because it mirrored mine.
We both thought Jane’s appearance was startling less because she is so attractive than that she comes across as refreshingly candid, friendly and open. She really is a perfect poster person for what we’re trying to do here.
My friend said “Katie Couric would KILL for eyes that are so openly and lucidly honest.” I know that’s what he said, ’cause I wrote it down when I got back to my office.
“The work that the DNC organizers are doin’ in this state is outstandin’…why aren’t we seein’ the national party on the attack everywhere?”
Ol’ boyism between DINOs and Repubs.
Katie Couric, great shoes. Compromised brain.
NorskeFlamethrower,
I think Hillary invited Ned up to her digs and ponied up some money and farmed out some major league political talent for him. I think she could probably do more, but don’t pretend she isn’t throwing down for Ned.
I can’t say I’m all behind Hillary, but I’m not opposed to her either. Hopefully she can find her legs on several issues we can support her on. The only thing in the middle of the road is a yellow stripe. Still, the focus should be on ‘06 right now.
This former GOP NY politician telling Tweets on Hardball that this is going to be a bad year for Republicans.
Yeah right! Bad year for smugness, lawlessness, cheating, usurpation and Republican sedition..
Oilfieldguy @ 48
Jerome Armstrong of MyDD is working for him, so he did have some contact even before YKos.
Again, everyone, I’d caution against passing judgment on Warner based on the unattributed statement of a NYTimes writer who’s so badly wrong on Lieberman. And before you make campaigning with Ned your litmus test for anyone, make sure that their absence from CT is their choice and not Ned’s.
Matthews just quote Broder with something like “Bush started a war he couldn’t finish, drove a country into debt and wants to torture. Boy, that is surprising for Broder.
darkblack @ 63
Vurp’d?
Without world peace and the threat of nuclear conflagration, nothing else matters. If Senator Clinton doesn’t change her mind on the Middle East by 2008, I will vote for her if that’s what’s forced upon me by the DLC and the rest of the movers and shakers in the Democratic Party. My party. But it will be a bitter pill to swallow. At least for me.
meta @ 43
Now just hold on there. That’s the reporter speaking - not Warner. Listen, I’ve had two brushes with Warner. One was many months ago at a friend’s luncheon for him when he was first just starting to test the waters. When asked questions he didn’t know, he said, “I don’t know.” My friend and I thought “Honest, but the Republicans will eat him alive.” CUT TO: Several months later (very kinda recently) at another dinner. I gotta tell you the transformation was stunning. This is a man who does his homework and wants this gig. He’s a very quick study. He’s still got miles to go but it’s a marathon and I think he might just be pacing himself. My only problem with him AND I KNOW THIS IS TOTALLY SUPERFICIAL AND SHOULDN’T MATTER BUT IT DOES: his teeth. They’re fake and they look it. Please someone - tell him to get them redone. Contact me, I have a perfectionist for a dds I’d be happy to refer him to. But I digress.
So other than Feingold (whom I love just for his spine) and Al-Playing-Hard-To-Get-Gore whom I secretly still blame for losing 2000 (IT SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN THAT CLOSE) there’s no one I like.
And speaking of not liking…this is totally OT but I just have to rant a second cause I’m so PISSED…I wake up from a lovely nap to the headline: Schumer and Pelosi tell Chavez NOT TO BASH BUSH. I thought I had woken up in some parallel universe or something. First of all everything the man said about Bush is true and second, he’s bringing OIL FOR THE POOR because they can’t afford it thanks to the energy policy Darth Vadar and his friends at the oil company created. If they didn’t like what he said, why didn’t they just keep their mouths shut????
Okay, I’m done. Thank you all for letting me vomit.
darkblack @ 63
Well, when he is not comsumed with raising money for Scooter’s defense fund.
The Tidal Wave Heading Straight For the Hall of Mirrors: by David Sirota
There are times every now and again where you just have to step back and behold the absurdity of it all. You have to step back from the day-to-day trench wars and just marvel at how entrenched power really is in this, the country where we still cling to Horatio Alger fables or “anyone can grow up to be president” myths. What I find particularly fascinating is the intricacy and careful calibration of the propaganda system that holds this whole structure up. Like a hall of mirrors, our political debate is, in every way, designed to perpetuate the status quo. But no hall of mirrors can withstand the impact of a big enough tidal wave, which is why those inside the hall are freaking out.
rest here: http://www.opednews.com/articl....._headi.htm
Warner does not thrill me. I’d put him probably at eight or nine on my own preferred list. Prolly right below Hillary, who’s below Dodd, who’s below Richardson, then there’s Edwards, Clark, Feingold, a question mark or two, then Gore up at the top all by his lonesome.
And can anybody possibly think JoMo doesn’t fantasize about all sympathetic MSM coverage his snivelling, preening “my party left me” speeches would get? Please….
No kidding, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Nobody said you have to cheerlead him, but if he wants to catapult the propaganda, who’s to argue?
ccmask @ 2:59 pm (#69) -Matthews just quote Broder with something like “Bush started a war he couldn’t finish, drove a country into debt and wants to torture.
Well, to quote Josh Marshall:
That Broder at least got it partly right is encouraging, I suppose, and maybe more given his prejudices. Clearly, torture isn’t just a bad word to the libruls.
Sue @ 34
Really? I was upset with her about the story she wrote about Ned’s letter to Lieberman (as a private citizen) during the Clinton impeachment mess - I thought she did a hack job on that and wrote her to say so.
But I thought this article was pretty well done - there certainly was a lot of material about Lamont and his campaign’s perspective on who they want to campaign on his behalf - and who they did not - which I found fascinating.
I got a chance to meet with Jennifer at the FDL get together in Branford. I thought she was genuinely interested in the netroots and their support of Lamont.
Another paragraph from my #75 link:
Today, we see David Broder quite literally losing control of his faculties on the pages of the Washington Post. You can almost see the veins popping out of that shiny white forehead you’ve gotten so used to seeing on Meet the Press. Like the bad, overdone stereotype of the crotchety senior who is angry that the world around him is changing, Broder declares that there needs to be “a new movement in this country” to “resist “the extremist elements in American society.” Who are these extremists? Why, people who use the Internet to politically organize and engage. Yes, according to Broder, “bloggers” are the moral equivalent of “doctrinaire religious extremists” - yet again, another not-so-subtle effort to portray anyone who dares to excercize their democratic rights as an Osama bin Laden supporter. He then fires off a screed about various politicians such as Rep. Sherrod Brown. He calls him “a loud advocate of protectionist policies that offer a false hope of solving our trade and job problems.” Right, becaue in David Broder’s cloistered world, the “free” trade deals Brown has opposed have done such wonders for places like Ohio. In David Broder’s world, those hundreds of thousands of blue collar workers who have been thrown out onto the street thanks to NAFTA and China PNTR are the filth of the earth that high and mighty elite Washington journalists like him cannot be bothered with. In David Broder’s world, any request for our trade pacts to include restrictions on child slavery, environmental degradation, and pharmaceutical industry profiteering off desperately poor people, positively un-American. Why? Because David Broder lives in a place where all of these critical issues are merely just more fodder and gossip for a newspaper column - not real challenges in his life, nor in the life of the people he spends his time with in the Washington Beltway.
David Sirota rocks!
If it was the moral thing to do in 1948 to establish the state of Israel, then it is the moral thing to do today to establish a homeland for the Palestinians. To deny one, is to deny the other.
OT - Former President Clinton, on NPR’s Morning Edition :
What does “on balance” mean?
Yes he does. Make sure you read his whole article. It is really outstanding today.
What you see here, folks, is that all of it - the elections, the public policies, the future of the country - is one big joke to the people in power, and they are willing to lie, cheat and distort anything to protect the integrity of that joke they are so happily enjoying. They don’t want anyone asking questions of them. They don’t want anyone thinking they have a right to use democracy to change things. They are fat and happy and putting the pedal to the metal in their sleek sports car on the great American highway overpass - and anyone who tries to slow them down, run them off the road or make them just glance at the blight below gets the big, road-raged middle finger.
–David Sirota
And here is the full Broder quote Matthews read tonite:
The country thought Bush was a pleasant, down-to-earth guy who would not rock the boat. Instead, swayed by some inner impulse or the influence of Dick Cheney, he has proved to be lawless and reckless. He started a war he cannot finish, drove the government into debt and repeatedly defied the Constitution.
Blumenthal says:
“Bush had intended to use his post-Hamdan bill to taint the Democrats, but instead he has split his party and further antagonised the military.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm.....01,00.html
Warner? I grow disenchanted. Hell, by the time I get to vote in the FL primary, he’ll be gone, anyway.
ccmask,
I so agree about Broder and his descent into senility and irrelevancy. He reminds me of the grandfather on the Simpsons railing about all these whippersnappers and where are my socks?
On another topic, boy, was I wrong about the prospects for the Bush torture-kangaroo courts bill. I should never bet against Republican “statesmen” acting like weasels. Still there is some chance time will run out on this thing but what a disappointment. Graham’s statements about protecting American soldiers are probably based on the notion that they will never get captured.
Well, I for one, do not care for any candidate who can’t take a firm stand and is just waiting to see which way the proverbial wind blows, depending on how things “evolve”. Love Feingold for standing alone so much of the time. That is fearlessness. Paul Wellstone (RIP) was also a masterful practitioner of being and believing and not giving a hoot for the conventional wisdom.
but that’s just me.
I think the most telling thing that proves the Gop is scared is the sudden and slowly dropping price of gasoline. If they were confident, they would never drop the price.
And Hugh, thanks for all the time you spend on our daily gasoline charting. I don’t think I’ve ever thanked you but better late than never, no?
These 2008 wannabees like Warner are coming to Iowa already. Not to my neck of the woods yet, but to Des Moines and the university towns. Warner has the charisma of a recliner on TV. Maybe he improves up close.
OT Campaign really needs help with a less than adequate web site. If you can help, susan at omnitelcom[dotcom]
angie @ 89
A certain Senator has like 20 consultants to tell her just the wind direction on any given day. Or night.
I thought the article was interesting precisely because it offered Lamont and his campaign’s perspective on who they do or do not want to come to campaign on Lamont’s behalf. This was a revelation to me. Clearly the campaign wants this to remain Connecticut focused and not a beauty contest for potential presidential candidates for 2008. I got the impression that many Dems have volunteered to come campaign for Lamont, but that they are being very strategic about who comes and when.
I do know that Congresswomen Maxine Waters will be coming back to do door to door canvassing for Lamont. I don’t know if there are others from the primary who will return, as well.
Good for the Lamont campaign - they aren’t star struck - they aren’t being bulldozed - they are making decisions based on what they think is the best strategy to educate voters about who Ned Lamont is - and get their buy-in.
ccmask @ 90
You are very welcome.
CNN.com is reporting that Rangel and Pelosi are telling Chavez not to scold Bush.
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Two of President Bush’s staunchest domestic critics leapt to his defense Thursday, a day after one of his fiercest foreign foes called him “the devil” in a scorching speech before the United Nations.
“You don’t come into my country; you don’t come into my congressional district and you don’t condemn my president,” Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, scolded Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, was blunt in her criticism of the Venezuelan leader. “He is an everyday thug,” she said.
Um, which party are Rangel and Pelosi in, again? ‘Cause I think that, while Chavez was over the top by US standards, he said some things that needed saying. And I don’t think that the Dems should defend the Shrub.
Tucker Carlson is another loser. He’s been on for 35 minutes and has yet to mention that soldiers are still dying. This is the third time I have watched his show.
Just saw this over at Talking Points Memo…
From the AP
“A prominent Republican who chairs I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby’s legal defense fund co-hosted a fundraiser Wednesday for Sen.
Joe Lieberman, who is running for re-election as an independent after losing the Democratic primary.
Mel Sembler, a former Republican National Committee finance committee chairman, helped organize a reception that raised about a “couple hundred thousand dollars” for Lieberman, who was in attendance. Sembler said the event at his firm’s office in St. Petersburg, Fla., drew a mix of Republican, Democratic and independent donors.”
Bush Controlling Gas Prices–on Tucker’s screen? He says that there is data that shows the price of gas corresponds to Bush’s approval rating…