« "A cataclysmic fight to the death" | Main | Okay... NOW What? »
The First Steps Are the Hardest
The euphoria is settling, though I am still dancing on air. The victories guaranteeing Democratic control of Congress is a breathtakingly giddy, rewarding aftermath after six long years of bitterness, fury and regret under an uncontrolled and uncontrollable Bush Administration and Republican majority in Congress.
Today, I keep wanting to pinch myself, and then take few friends out to dinner somewhere and preen gloriously under the stars of a city where Nancy Pelosi started her political career. She built a Democratic machine which in San Francisco, Sacramento and California, still endures.
Which brings me to the next topic: "WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?"
I found this gladkov diary from KOS truly impressive for its grasp of the realities Nancy Pelosi will be facing as Speaker of the House. Up against a President, albeit a truly lame duck President, who still has a media arsenal and a remaining Republican contingent that brought another sitting Presidency to its knees by pressing for investigations on allegations of scandal, Pelosi is right in the middle of a machine that still functions this way. And this machine is no joke. It operates as a take-no-prisoners grinding mechanism, and the new class of freshmen congresspeople and the new Speaker of the House will be marks for its hopper.
Which is why the KOS diary is important. It stresses the need to see the realities the new speaker will see inside the House, and suggests patience--on both sides of the aisle in Congress and across the country.
On a personal note, I've seen Pelosi's work close up. She started her work on the ground level, raising money for Democratic candidates in the Bay Area. She rose to prominence from this groundwork, and is as relentless as she is gracious, with a knack for creating long-term political solutions and institutions that still operate to this day. Attested to by the candidacies and long-term tenure of Senators Feinstein and Boxer. They are still at their posts.
The first steps for all of us are the hardest, and in this instance for Democrats, who have been held in check for so long. Perhaps for the new Speaker, these first steps will be the hardest of all. But after seeing her work over many years, we may have cause to have faith in her ability to think in the long term, which is what our country needs right now.
Its been a long while since adults have been in charge. Its time to let them take the reins, and trust them. (Nice diary, occam's hatchet.)
As she spoke yesterday, I thought Nancy Pelosi showed a dignity that should make her detractors cringe.
Wes Clark was guest on Diane Rehm's 1st hour this morning. I'm just now listening, so I can't review yet... blurb:
Rumsfeld Resigns; Gates Nominated
In the wake of what he calls "a thumping" in midterm elections, President Bush announces he's replacing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Diane and her guests talk about the fallout from this decision and its longer-term implications.
Guests
Gen. Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander
Max Boot, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and author of "War Made New" (Gotham Books)
Ron Elving, Washington editor for National Public Radio
link page with audio replays: http://www.wamu.org/programs/dr/06/11/09.php#12344
Fe,
Very good comments and lots to think about. In the last few days it has felt like a weight off my shoulders but if I implied yesterday we should forgive and forget then that wasn't what I meant.
Your article points out the things that we have to remember to fight for. Nancy Pelosi is still trapped between and unethical egomaniac and the his servant media as well as the remaining people who orchestrated Clinton's demise.
I'm not sure if anyone caught this about Rush but I gather from his statement that he's going to love to dig his teeth into her and draw fresh blood.
http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=24814
Allen to Concede at 3pm
In a related story... Bubba To Explode!!!
Go Ira! Go Ira! It's yer burfday...
from http://www.SeattleWeekly.com
The sun is out (kind of).
Democrats are back in control of the House, and probably Senate.
Rumsfeld quit.
And there'll be opera on network television.
Topics: Classical Music
How can we feel good about the election results when all our old certainties have suddenly been cast into doubt?
WAS IT REALLY so long ago? Only last Monday, you could comfortably enter a Wallingford pub, order a microbrew, punch up a few Indigo Girls songs on the jukebox, and safely commiserate about Bush with fellow lockstep liberals. Iraq? All W's fault. Katrina? Him, too. Economic disparity and record deficits? That we could blame on the Republican Congress—along with institutional homophobia, the bigotry of the "pro-family" crowd, and Karl Rove's wedge-issue gerrymandering of democracy to suit the donor class and its K Street lobbyists. Yet there was a rosy glow to our discontent, especially after the third pint or fourth. There was a nobility to being on the outs, a camaraderie in our valorous outnumbered cause. We few, we happy few, we band of brothers.
Then we could rush home to watch The Daily Show from beneath our sheets of organic cotton and quilts of humanely plucked goose down. O! how we laughed—rueful, superior, condescending—at those morons running the country. O! how fortunate we were to live in our insular enclave of good sense, public radio, and Toyota Priuses.
Now, after Nov. 7, the smug certainty is over. Democrats will control the House of Representatives next year and the Senate. Meaning Baghdad just moved into the 98105 zip code. Meaning Condi and Cheney and the new defense secretary nominee, Robert Gates, are now going to be in the same checkout line at the PCC. Meaning Bush is now just another harried parent carpooling your kids to soccer practice.
For six years, wimpy liberals have taken solace in irony, snark, and condescension—the only power they had, really—particularly in Seattle, where a new antiwar documentary seems to arrive every week (see: Iraq in Fragments, currently at the Varsity) and where books like Fiasco and State of Denial and The Greatest Story Ever Sold are top sellers. Now we have to work with these people we once despised and considered so foreign. Clinging to those moss-covered Kerry-Edwards yard signs and bumper stickers for the next two years won't do anybody any good. The microbrews won't taste as sweet, and the jokes won't be as easy anymore—not as the Democrats have to co-pilot our country out of Iraq, debt, and nuclear showdowns with Iran and North Korea.
Suddenly, pencil-necked bloggers and irate stand-up comics will have to reconsider their shtick. Between Bill O'Reilly and Al Franken, the rim-shot binary sniping between red and blue has become all muddled. New House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will be fair game on South Park. Conan, Jay, and Dave will have to elevate liberal buffoons like Jim McDermott and Barney Frank to being accountable liberal buffoons.
Our glorious liberal impotence is at an end, and not a moment too soon. Who isn't tired of a world divided between Republican arrogance and Democratic ironies?
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0646/xlawoeux.php
can we utube link Allen's concession speech?
Republicans try to sneak John Bolton confirmation before adjournment.
It is now 3 pm, November 9, 2006 and Virginia can now be officially colored BLUE.
Posted by: DiAnne at November 9, 2006 03:03 PM
"I didn't know where I was, until you killed my buzz" - The Iguanas
Bubba:
Lincoln Chaffee stated that he will vote against the Bolton nomination.
Bolton nom is dead in the H2O.
Great article on the New Southern Strategy and how Webb and McCaskill went right into the heart of red voters and delivered a populist message to working class voters without hedging their positions on cultural issues. How refreshing that Dems have finally engaged conservative voters on their own turf without backing down or apologizing for who they are or what they stand for.Our dcp member Linda Enterkin(sp?) should be encouraged to read this story.
www.alternet.org/stories/44085
GOP officeholders turned off and lost Republican voters
BY JEFFREY R. LEWIS
November 9, 2006
As a lifelong Republican, I was not surprised by the widespread repudiation of my party in Tuesday's election. Even more, though, I'm frustrated by the reasons behind it -- that congressional Republicans and the Bush administration are more interested in courting an ultra-conservative base and currying favor with their corporate backers than making life better for middle class Americans.
I am frustrated that the party is shutting out and turning off Republicans like me.
My values are fundamentally conservative, and I voted for the "compassionate conservative" who sought the White House six years ago. But ever since, Republicans like me have watched in dismay as the Bush administration turned its back on the Americans who needed compassion the most.
Make no mistake, the biggest issue in this election was President George W. Bush and his handling of the Iraq war. But on Election Day, it was those of us angered at the national party's abandonment of real Republican values who swept so many incumbent Republicans from their seats.
When I grew up, Republicans considered waste a sin and indifference to the suffering of others immoral. Today, the administration's policy on stem cell research has turned both of these injunctions on their heads. If Orrin Hatch and Ted Kennedy can agree on the value of stem cell research, surely enough common ground exists to support a bipartisan solution. In California, a successful ballot measure backed by Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Silicon Valley venture capitalists and voters from both sides of the aisle is already helping bring American entrepreneurial ingenuity to bear on the challenges and opportunities of stem cell research.
What could be more Republican than that? Why can't the president follow suit?
This administration's health care policies have been a disaster. If the president had meant what he said about reaching out to those who did not vote for him, he might have begun by using traditional Republican principles as a basis for new health care initiatives that can make a meaningful difference in peoples' lives.
Never has the discipline of a free market, for example, been more needed than with respect to today's pharmaceutical industry. Yet nowhere is the "free market" less free. With drug prices rising at three times the rate of inflation and exploding health care costs hurting increasing numbers of middle class Americans, the administration's rejection of market-based cost containment measures is baffling.
Why on Earth would a free-market administration prohibit Medicare and governors from negotiating directly with drug manufacturers to obtain the lowest possible drug prices -- except to protect pharmaceutical industry profits? And why would the administration insist on using the private sector to set prices, rather than the market itself? Clarion calls for smaller government ring hollow when government edict requires that private companies be paid to do something that consumers can do more efficiently themselves.
Moreover, corporate protectionism doesn't work; drug prices continue to climb, while growing numbers of seniors are being forced to choose between food and medicine, and millions more uninsured middle class Americans simply go without. Foisting a costly and inefficient system on middle class Americans who have traditionally been the heart of the Republican Party is neither compassionate nor conservative.
In the meantime, truly compassionate conservatives would insist on easing the plight of the 45 million Americans who have no health insurance -- men, women and children who die sooner than the rest of us because they receive only about half the medical care of the insured. Further, the share of Americans without insurance is growing, while health care costs rise much faster than wages or inflation. As a result, health care costs are quickly and quietly bankrupting thousands of American families. How does that preserve "family values"?
And uninsured Americans who do get seriously ill eventually end up in hospitals, usually at taxpayer expense. The public cost of uncompensated care amounts to a $30-billion tax burden on people who have insurance. How about a tax cut for us?
I am a Republican who believes government should be responsive to reason rather than special interests, that government should spend no more of the taxpayers' money than absolutely necessary, and that the market is usually the best and most efficient arbiter of prices. But I also believe that problems are really only opportunities to create solutions, and that sometimes we need our government to put politics aside and bring disparate views together to find those solutions. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership and President Bush have stubbornly refused to walk across the aisle to do that.
Ironically, their insistence on playing politics -- by pandering shamelessly to the far right and corporate lobbyists instead of listening to Republicans like me -- has brought about one of the biggest Republican political disaster in a generation.
JEFFREY LEWIS, 52, a Detroit native and a graduate of Henry Ford High School and the University of Michigan, chairs the board of the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement and is a former staff director for the late U.S. Sen. John Heinz, R-Pa.
Posted by: Bubba at November 9, 2006 04:27 PM
Yes, yes, yes. A beautiful thing. Truly. :-)
But then you totally got why I was so overwhelmed with joy yesterday. :-) I haven't yet found the words to describe what it feels like here, what sort of campaign was run. A bit of new, lots of old, hey, just solid good sense. And very real. Rural rightwingers got it as well as long-time liberals. These voices will be heard from again. They are the bridge builders. And they aren't soft.
Bubba,
What happened in Missouri and Virginia was huge. I hope more people read about what they did and how they accomplished their victory. Because what happened is the future... Claire and Jim showed us all how it's done. 'Wingers must be engaged. It isn't easy. Trust me, it isn't easy. And to engage them and change their minds in less than two years is nothing short of a miracle. Well, hard work = miracle that is. ;-)
Thank you for that link. Short article, but gives a good accounting of the style and substance.
So much hope. Claire and Jim showed it could be done. And from what I can tell re: their words since, neither one of them are taking anything for granted.
Ken Mehlman leaving RNC chairmanship...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/9/182627/502
You know, the hell of it is that many Democrats don't care about a person's sexual preference because it's really none of our business. It's as important as whether they like crunchy or creamy peanut butter. But I find it interesting that several republicans in key positions in the party are being outed lately -- from the closet & their positions. And I'll never understand how they can be a part of a political party that hates them.
Tuesday night, I kept my browser window open to the Missouri Secretary of State site and followed two county returns in a separate window. In the county we just moved away from, a heavily rural area, extremely red, McCaskill lost to Talent by only 540 votes. (In that county only two years ago, twice as many people voted for Bush as for Kerry.) In the county we just moved to, less rural, still red, McCaskill only lost by 369 votes. She made inroads into these solidly Republican counties in a stunning, straight forward way that was gratifying to see. Of course the latest scandals and the war and etc. played a part, otherwise we wouldn't see what we're seeing nationwide. But McCaskill did what she did because she knows how to talk to real people about issues that really matter and she isn't afraid to stand up for her views or pull a punch when she has to. I love Nancy Pelosi, but I hope she takes a meeting with Claire, and listens. ;-)
"And I'll never understand how they can be a part of a political party that hates them."
~~Posted by: madame defarge at November 9, 2006 06:41 PM
Money? Power? Status? @;-)
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/11/cnn-tells-youtube-to-pull-down-video.html
CNN tells YouTube to pull down video outing GOP party head Ken Mehlman
William Rivers Pitt: A Deep, Deep Breath
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110906Z.shtml
Let us be absolutely clear on what has taken place. This was not simply a midterm election, not just a historic running of the table, not just a scathing repudiation of virtually everything the Bush administration has stood for since they swaggered into Washington six long years ago. It was so very much more than this.
Robert Parry | The Secret World of Robert Gates
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110906A.shtml
Robert Parry writes, "Robert Gates, George W. Bush’s choice to replace Donald Rumsfeld as Defense Secretary, is a trusted figure within the Bush family’s inner circle, but there are lingering questions about whether Gates is a trustworthy public official."
McGovern and Polk | A Blueprint for Leaving Iraq Now
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110906C.shtml
"Staying in Iraq is not an option," write George S. McGovern and William R. Polk. "Many Americans who were among the most eager to invade Iraq now urge that we find a way out. These Americans include not only civilian 'strategists' and other 'hawks,' but also senior military commanders and, perhaps most fervently, combat soldiers."
Gerard Dupuy | Repudiation
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110906H.shtml
Lead editorials at Liberation and Le Monde today suggest that the US electorate's repudiation of Republicans has forced President Bush to repudiate Donald Rumsfeld in order to save his own "popularity."
Ballot Measure Losses Stagger the Religious Right
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110906P.shtml
From the country's heartland, voters sent messages that altered America's culture wars and dismayed the religious right - defending abortion rights in South Dakota, endorsing stem cell research in Missouri, and, in a national first, rejecting a same-sex marriage ban in Arizona.
ps and yes Ira, I think Linda E would enjoy the article. Economic issues addressed as such cut across all sorts lines, including race, religion and die-hard party affiliation.
Rangel's itching to evict Cheney
BY AUSTIN FENNER
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER
New York Daily News
Thursday, November 9th, 2006
Harlem's newly powerful Rep. Charles Rangel wants to stick it to his White House nemesis Vice President Cheney - by taking over his spacious House office.
At the same time, the veteran congressman offered a limp olive branch to the vice president yesterday, saying he regretted publicly calling him an SOB last week.
"I take back saying that publicly. I should have reserved that for him when we were together privately," said Rangel. "Believe me, he would have understood."
Rangel (D-Harlem), poised to become the next chairman of the important House Ways and Means Committee, spoke of the need for bipartisanship with the Republicans, even as he continued his feud with Cheney.
"Mr. Cheney enjoys an office on the second floor on the House of Representatives that historically has been designated as the Ways and Means chairman," Rangel mused. "And, I've talked with [future Speaker of the House] Nancy Pelosi ... and I'm trying to find some way to be gentle as I restore the dignity of that office to the chair."
The White House declined to comment.
In the past, Rangel has branded the vice president a "draft dodger" and Cheney has predicted that Rangel would destroy the economy as head of the Ways and Means Committee.
Rangel, 76, will soon head the committee, which controls tax legislation and changes to Social Security and Medicaid.He shot down rumors that Democrats plan to raise taxes in 2010, when Republican-approved tax cuts will expire if they are not extended by Congress, and said that the country needs a bipartisan approach
"The American people have given the Democrats a great opportunity to provide leadership. I'm not certain they are in love with us, but one thing is certain is that they were not satisfied with the Republicans' leadership," said Rangel. "The only thing that is clear is that the way we can resolve these problems [the issues] is by working with the Republicans."
http://www.nydailynews.com/front/v-pfriendly/story/469781p-395191c.html
karen:
Thanks for posting that op/ed by Jeff Lewis. I've been waiting for him to drop that other show for a LONG time.
Chafee unsure of staying with GOP after losing election
By Michelle R. Smith, Associated Press Writer
November 9, 2006
PROVIDENCE, R.I. --Two days after losing a bid for a second term in an election seen as a referendum on President Bush and the Republican Party, Sen. Lincoln Chafee said he was unsure whether he'd remain a Republican.
"I haven't made any decisions. I just haven't even thought about where my place is," Chafee said at a news conference Thursday when asked whether he would stick with the Republican Party or switch to be an independent or Democrat.
When asked if his comments meant he thought he might not belong in the Republican Party, he replied: "That's fair."
more...
http://tinyurl.com/tzhuz
I meant other "SHOE" not "show".
FROM SF GATE:
PELOSI: Lifetime commitment to politics, Democrats
Edward Epstein, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Wednesday, November 8, 2006
(11-08) 04:00 PST Washington -- Even some of Rep. Nancy Pelosi's closest political allies would never have predicted her rise to national political stardom.
John Burton, the former congressman and state Senate president, remembered being summoned in early 1987 to the Washington deathbed of his sister-in-law, Rep. Sala Burton, the widow of legendary congressman Phil Burton.
"They told me Sala wanted Nancy to run for her seat'' in a special election that would be called when she died, John Burton said. "I thought they meant Nancy Walker,'' a member of San Francisco's Board of Supervisors, and not Pelosi, then little known outside of Democratic Party circles.
John Burton was surprised and a little skeptical when he learned Sala Burton meant Pelosi, the former state Democratic chairman noted for her fundraising prowess but untested as a candidate.
"I thought Sala would say she wanted Nancy because of friendship, but she talked about Nancy's talent and commitment to Democratic causes,'' he remembered.
And now the 66-year-old Pelosi is primed to become the first Californian and the first woman elected speaker of the House, one of the nation's most powerful offices, and second in line of presidential succession.
"Here it is, and everything Sala said Nancy had she has in spades,'' said Burton, who is a close Pelosi adviser.
The novice candidate Pelosi won a raucous 14-candidate special election in June 1987 to fill Sala Burton's seat and has been re-elected in landslides ever since. Looking back on her life story, it probably is little surprise that she has displayed a lifetime commitment to politics and the Democratic Party.
The daughter of Baltimore mayor and congressman Thomas D'Alesandro Jr., known as "Old Tommy,'' and his dynamo of a wife, Annunciata, Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi was born March 26, 1940, into a family of committed Catholics and New Deal Democrats.
The family's business was politics, centered on the D'Alesandro home on Albemarle Street in Baltimore's Little Italy. Depression times were tough. Family members remember that wood scavenged from demolished buildings was piled up in front of the D'Alesandro house for the poor to take home to burn for heat. And hungry strangers often ate for free in the family's kitchen.
The elder D'Alesandro kept an office in the front room, where young Nancy at times helped constituents in search of help.
"We all took turns at the desk,'' recalled Pelosi's brother, Thomas D'Alesandro III, known as "Young Tommy,'' who served as Baltimore mayor in the late 1960s. "My mother was really the politician in the family, and Nancy was the apple of her eye. She takes after her. She's tough.''
Pelosi attended Trinity College in Washington, D.C., where she watched President John F. Kennedy's inaugural. She met San Franciscan Paul Pelosi, who was attending Washington's Georgetown University. They married in 1963, moved to New York and had five children in six years.
Democratic politics was an obsession for the young mother. Pelosi's daughter, Christine, said one of her first memories is at age 2 going door to door with her mother in 1968 canvassing for Democratic presidential nominee Hubert Humphrey.
In 1969, Paul Pelosi moved the family back to his home of San Francisco and became a wealthy businessman.
Nancy Pelosi dived into Democratic activities as a volunteer and started to raise money for the party and candidates, something friends and critics agree she excels at.
Pelosi eventually served on the Democratic National Committee and in the early 1980s was the state party chairwoman. She also chaired the host committee for the 1984 Democratic national convention at San Francisco's Moscone Center.
After winning her seat in 1987 with the backing of the city's Democratic establishment, Pelosi never looked back. Pelosi entered leadership when she was elected by the Democratic caucus in 2000 as the first woman to serve as whip (the No. 2 post in the minority party), in 2002 as minority leader, and -- expected in party elections next week -- now as speaker.
Just remember, Pelosi did everything Dennis Hastert did. Only backwards and in high heels.
Yes, Ginger.
Question: Isn't Gates as replacement for Rumsfeld just another slap in the face to American voters - a smug self-satisfied act of nepotism (thinking Bolton, thinking Rice) by the little shrub? Wasn't it mostly CIA self-serving "intelligence" that got us all into this debacle, and ongoing tragedy, in the first place?
Tom Vilsak is running in '08 - we should have an interesting field on both sides. More feeling of democracy now - & get rid of those machines.
I think Chafee and others should be Independents - after all, American has about equal parts Republicans, Democrats and Independents in the country. I'm not talking a killjoy like Nader. It would be interesting to have three big parties & a whole bunch of little ones. We do finally have a Muslim. We do have a Socialist - in Congress. Almost like other countries. We are not a one party state!! We have maybe escaped dictatorship/totalitarianism.
Why not have a coalition government? Maybe abolish the electoral system. How about Instant Runoff? Let's hear some ideas. Why not shake things up a little?! Let's question free trade a little - think about globalization. The environment. Let's look at the rest of the world and listen to them at the same time.
Well, off to traffic.
A little more -
I agree with Ted Koppel that it may have been a little dumb to take out Saddam - he was the only thing Iran was afraid of.
I agree with Hosni Mubarak that it might be really dumb to execute Saddam. I believe death penalty is wrong in all cases & agree with Mubarak that we would see "waterfalls" of violence in the middle east.
A superstate should not execute someone who people identify with in a tribal-based society. It just isn't going to work. There would/will be major "blowback."
I also suggest that we butt out of Central America and South America for a while. & while we're at it, let's look a little closer at Israel - they really should not be swooping down on French UN soldiers, to scare them. No one has really taken on even-handed look at why we don't have a nuclear-free middle east since John F Kennedy!
Ok I'm out.
woz --
Yes, but Gates is old-school CIA, not a latter-day PNAC type. What is happening here is that Bush 43 is finally jettisoning his disastrous and contentious neokonzertruppe cohorts and reverting back to the policies & people that worked well for Bush 41. Five years too late, mind you, but still Freudian as all get-out.
but oh those oedipus wrecks,
Otter
Gates was an empty suit that played dumb about Ollie North Iran contra hearings.
More info about Gates;
From the Iran/Contra and his confirmation hearings to head the CIA
http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh11082006.html
He is another Dumbya POS who will probably be confirmed.
The beat goes on.
Bush's phony concilliation attempt really frosts me.
His so called support the troops while they are totally worn out is an insult to all who care about our military. Their equipment is broken, their medical care is being cut back; their enlistments have been extended.
dumbya treats the troops like used toilet paper; flush when done.
More info about Robert Gates (no relation to Bill, of course)
Robert Gates Promoted and Financed Osama Bin Laden
Robert Gates made Osama Bin Laden what he is today. This is not exaggeration. By funding Osama Bin Laden's operations, training camps, weaponry and political influence from 1979 (even before Russia invaded Afghanistan), Robert Gates personally gave us our principal enemy in the "War on Terror".
More frighteningly, all of Robert Gates' support to Osama Bin Laden ran through Pakistan's ISI. ISI has been linked to training and funding the 9/11 bombers, the London bombers, the Madrid bombers, the Bali bombers and the Delhi bombers but is strangely immune from official Washington scrutiny.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/9/34541/0328
Old school maybe, Otter, but Gates must surely be accepting of the current administration stance on torture and murder of prisoners who can't outlast their interrogation - I mean - interview. Otherwise the son wouldn't want him. The only people he ever chooses are those who will carry him, without question, through the crocodile swamps of his own making.
I think the last verse of kumbiyah is sung.
Dems can work with Dumbya only if they trust him. Does anybody think they can trust Dumbya any further then they can toss him?
I doubt it.
Dumbya is dieing to have Dems take the leadership role in Iraq and entitlement program changes so Repubs can blame any failure on Dems.
So my crystal ball sez Bush will make totally outlandish proposals. Dems will make moderate ones. Bush will sabotage them and blame Dems for the policy failures. This president's motto is pass the buck.
It happens in big business all the time.
We need to force Bush to stay engaged on everything; even when he wants to cut and run.
The link describing McGovern and Polk plan to get us out of Iraq is a sound one.
We essentially finance the deal and let local troops from Iraq and their neighbors do the heavy lifting.
The only way we keep control of the Senate and take the WH is to make progress cleaning up the mess made by dumbya.
We also have to make sure the reason for the mess is punished; mainly the Conservative ideology.
The fight we won tuesday is just another skirmish on the way to the 2008 war.
Oh my gosh madame - great name btw - are you knitting as you watch the heads fall? This is another of those "It was the best of times. It was the worst of times."
Why isn't this Gates-binLadenmore connection more widely publicised? Preferably before he's confirmed.
Are senate seats being challenged?
Posted by: woz at November 9, 2006 09:56 PM
Thanks, woz. (I do think the guillotine was underrated.)
No surprise that the mainstream media isn't saying anything about Gates/bin Laden. But then, mainstream media is becoming even more irrelevent. This election has proven that it's a whole new ballgame when it comes to educating people with the facts.
So pass the word on about Gates & bin Laden.
Posted by: woz at November 9, 2006 09:58 PM
No. The only senate seat left that could possibly be challenged in this election was the Webb-Allen seat, & Allen conceded today.
(I assume that's what you were talking about.)
(BTW, where in Oz are you?)
Remember the midset during the Cold War. The USSR was funding terror on their own and through Cuba in Africa, Central and South America. We needed our terrorists to battle their terrorists. I use the word terrorist loosly as many were Democraticly elected organizations that opposed us. You are either with us or against us.
So we created bin Laden and turned him loose on the ruskies. We don't care about the needless murders. Why this is nothing more then collatoral damage. The Taliban? Why just another bunch of religious fundamentalists. They ride horses so they must be just like cowboys. Cowboys are cool...just ask Dumbya.
So what if we had to use another terrorist organization or two. We would rather murder them there then here.
Mission Accomplished.
Tasmania here Madame
Iraqi Official Estimates 150,000 Civilians Dead
http://www.forbes.com/home/feeds/ap/2006/11/09/ap3160676.html
This is 3x the official figure.
Also read "Stars & Stripes" reactions of military personnel to Rumsfeld's resignation. It's pretty obvious they do their jobs, aren't kept very informed & aren't allowed to say much. I've read more critical stuff in same publication before - friend sends it from Germany. Looked like they're really keeping a lid on speaking out, either about him or about the mission there.
A few weeks back, the number of Iraq deaths was estimated at over 650K.
Bush dismissed that number.
Read how that number was computed.
http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/attacks_on_lancet's_iraq_war.htm
Battlebob
Good summary of Cold War policy - it looked as though we weren't at war since everything was done by proxy. I recommend "Blowback - The Costs and Consequences of American Empire" - by Chalmers, 2000.
It takes a pre-9/11 look at our foreign policy. It maintains that plans to maintain and increase Empire cause resentment against Americans (military, travellers, students, businesspeople) that can lead to terrorism, especially those things done in secet.
"Blowback" was a CIA term that referred to unintended consequences of secret policies. What the MSM tended to report as acts of "terrorists" "rogue states" "arms merchants" or "drug lords" often turned out to be "blowback" from secret CIA operations.
When 9/11 happened, I wanted to know why. Was it blind hate or some sort of retaliation? With history of military firing cruise missiles and of US govt supporting repressive regimes when it was to our advantage, I wondered what we didn't know. I read this book immediately after 9/11.
It was the 1991 Gulf War and then Iran/Iraq war and the Soviet/Afghanistan war that got me interested in foreign policy again (after the Vietnam era, the slow-down in US/USSR nuclear buildup, and the fall of the Berlin Wall). & we had also had terror threats, including to our city of Seattle, around the Millenium (not to mention the Cole & the African embassy bombings & the lst attempt at the WTC).
This is from the book, which has hugely influence my thinking and which I relate directly to the appointment of Gates:
"Historical data show a strong correlation between U.S. involvement in international situations and an increase in terrorist attacks against the United States. In addition, the military asymmetry that denies nation states the ability to engage in overt attacks against the United States drives the use of transnational actors [that is, terrorists from one country attacking in another]." The most direct and obvious form of blowback often occurs when the victims fight back after a secret American bombing, or a U.S.-sponsored campaign of state terrorism, or a ClA-engineered overthrow of a foreign political leader.
More:
In pursuing the war in Vietnam in the early 1970s, President Richard Nixon and his national security adviser Henry Kissinger ordered more bombs dropped on rural Cambodia than had been dropped on Japan during all of World War 11, killing at least three-quarters of a million Cambodian peasants and helping legitimize the murderous Khmer Rouge movement under Pol Pot. In his subsequent pursuit of revenge and ideological purity Pol Pot ensured that another million and a half Cambodians, this time mainly urban dwellers, were murdered.
And:
Take the civil war in Afghanistan in the 1980s, in which Soviet forces directly intervened on the government side and the CIA armed and supported any and all groups willing to face the Soviet armies. .... the defeat so destabilized the Soviet regime that at the end of the 1980s it collapsed. But in Afghanistan the United States also helped bring to power the Taliban, a fundamentalist Islamic movement whose policies toward women, education, justice, and economic well-being resemble not so much those of Ayatollah Khomeini's Iran as those of Pol Pot's Cambodia. A group of these mujahedeen, who only a few years earlier the United States had armed with ground-to-air Stinger missiles, grew bitter over American acts and policies in the Gulf War and vis-a-vis Israel.
Other examples where we are at risk from "blowback" from our own policies:
Congo, Guatemala, Chile, Turkey. Many more.
We have overthrown regimes in central America in order for our corporations to benefit. Read about Pinoche!!!! We chastised Saddam for killing Kurds but looked the other way when the Turks did it. Between 1991 and 1995, the United States supplied four-fifths of Turkey's military imports, which were among the largest in the world.
Here is what I mean (from the book):
" The U.S. government, in turn, depends on the NATO base at Incirlik, Turkey, to carry out Operation Provide Comfort, set up after the Gulf War to supply and protect Iraqi Kurds from repression by Saddam Hussein-at the same time that the United States acquiesces in Turkish mistreatment of its far larger Kurdish population."
Why do we do it? We can make money selling arms. We can get ahold of oil. This government has never cared about religion, communism or terrorism so much as profit. There is no conscience when it comes to selling weapons or using up the planet's resources. Money is the root of evil.
I grew up in an arms race (US/USSR). I knew these were two competing empires. We were always told the conflict was between democracy and totalitarianism but it was between colonialism and national independence movements. The Europeans did not want to give up their colonies - that's why France was in Vietnam before we were. Algeria was their other Vietnam. Poor North/South Korea - pawns following WW2.
We sponsored dictators like Chiang Kai-shek, Marcos, sadistic Generals in Vietnam and Cambodia and Thailand, Suharto in Indonesia, Laos,
Reagan and CIA launched operations in Central American covertly to support insurgencies against the Sandanistas (and Ortega has just come back to power!) After the Cold War was over, we kept covert operations going just to keep our bases and imperial interests. We are overstretched.
The other brilliant book is called "Empire" - I don't have it right here - it outlines every empire that has ever been. I think we were number 60 something. Empires fall.
America is watching the rise of China and India and rest of Asia - economically, demographically inevitable. Our threat is our belief in our own propaganda. We need our foreign policy to be no longer planned by military-minded people. We need more ambassadors and diplomats with knowledge of languages, history, culture. We can't keep relying on cruise missiles, stealth bombers, arms sales and bribes.
Even though we don't know what all was done in our names, we pay every day in every way. .
Battlebob
If you're talking about the Lancet study, I have no quarrel with the methodology.
Battlebob - thanks for the link there to the lancet report on deaths and injured. We keep letting our leaders get away with their lies. And that's the problem - liars actually end up believing their own lies. And some of us slip into a state of self-doubt.
I'll have to go and draw some attention to this one also.
"Blowback" was a CIA term that referred to unintended consequences of secret policies. What the MSM tended to report as acts of "terrorists" "rogue states" "arms merchants" or "drug lords" often turned out to be "blowback" from secret CIA operations.
When 9/11 happened, I wanted to know why. Was it blind hate or some sort of retaliation?"
Posted by: DiAnne at November 9, 2006 10:58 PM
Me too. When bush said ' They hate us for our freedom', I had a sudden moment of clarity and thought to myself..
'There is only one reason why anyone murders, en mass, 3000 people. Money.'
Since I first thought it, I can not get over how...shaky?... it makes me.
You do NOT work , plot, and plan to kill 3000 people or more, because you hate their 'freedom'.
I think when this nation gets into the lies of Iraq, they will also have a terrible moment of clarity, as they realize the lies of Iraq were told to directly cover up and obscure the truth of 911.
When this nation realizes what really happened to us that day, there will be no stopping the 'blowback' that is going to explode right in georgies lap.
Why did 3000 people die on 911? Why did bin laden kill them? Why did georgie allow him to get away with it?
Money is the only answer.
It can not be a coincidence the two main beneficiaries of 911 was both the bush and bin laden families.
Something so wicked happened to us that day, we still do not even think to ask why.
We can not 'move forward' as a nation until we understand the truth of the recent past.
Oh and I am not trying to bug yall but...
I would like to clarify something about the candles and this search being set up.
I created the candle website itself for my cousin, but the 'fundraising' part is totally within the hands of Karrie.
I will not have access to your orders or account info. Only Karrie will.
Also, just to point it out, if you would prefer to just donate the money instead of buying a candle I know she would absolutely appreciate it.
The donations are fantastic because she can send 100% of it to Texas Equusearch instead of the 50% on each candle.
You know, even if you don't buy or donate, please consider sending Karrie just a message, you know, just to let her know you are there. I know she gets real upset sometimes, and I'm not sure how else to comfort her except to let her know she is not alone anymore.
Her email is
klrummell@yahoo.com
And ofcourse the candle site is
http://www.candlesforaline.blogspot.com/
Thank you guys. I will try not to bug you, but if I do please overlook it just until we can hit that 3500 mark.
Hey All:
Chuck in Houston here still stupidly maudlin, but wanting to share a thought on Rumsfeld/Gates etc.
Well first, can we get out the "flip-flops" for "stand-by-your-man" Bush who just a couple of days ago affirmed that Rumsfeld was his man and now runs him off like a red-headed stepchild???!!! So Bush family. When I can use you, I will. When you become a liability, you're toast (cf: Noriega). Loyalty is a one-way street with that mob. Oops, I guess I shouldn't go there. Nevermind.
Anyway, lots of interesting speculation about what worm is turning, especially vis-a-vis the mess we created in Iraq, and that is a horrible, painful, cruel and viscious mess. But what to do? And (unlike Vietnam) there are actual, real, national security issues at stake (energy indepedence anyone? Please?).
In a sense, our brave commander and CINC has just been brought to heel by papa (Gates, Baker, with the sanction of Warner/Lugar), based on the new political realities in America. Now we have a possibility of legislative oversight (they would never deal with us until we have some sort of actual power).
That is the state of play now that Jim Webb and John Tester are in the Senate as of the new session and now that Chafee of RI, bless his heart, has said (in effect) -- "I'm off the [GOP] reservation, so fire me already." (The Maine Senators may follow suit -- who knows?)
I would love to hear what Andree in France would make of all of this.
Chuck in Houston
PS: Florida_Dem -- if you are lurking -- I just have one thing to say to you:
YEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAW!
And with respect to Missouri, I just have to say:
KJ!KJ!KJ!KJ!
Your new senator's mama didn't raise no fool!
Missouri showed me somethig a couple days back>
Chuck in Houston
Hey Ira:
God bless you and yours. Look at this:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/4321792.html
All politics is local politics because all people live in some locale. Ideas + no organization = fantasy. Ideas + organization = victory.
Chuck in Houston
PS: I contributed nothing to this except my vote and some lean-on-the-fence conversations with neighbors, so we are still not reallt organized to my mind. Lots of work to do.
So I guess as things stand now if Bush and Cheney are impeached and convicted (and the bill of indictment would surely apply to both), Pelosi would be POTUS, right? (Oops, sorry, can't go there now -- looks too much like "piling on" -- 15-yard penalty to me. Plus no way we could get 2/3 of the Senate, not that that stopped Tom Delay.)
Chuck in Houston
Come to think on it, isn't "d'Lay" a French name? What's with that? Somehow I never noticed that before. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, understand me).
Chuck in Houston
Posted by: battlebob at November 9, 2006 10:07 PM
Mission Accompliced.
Posted by: battlebob at November 9, 2006 09:34 PM
Interesting. I thought when I saw him that he looks benign, but knew he couldn't be or else he would not be being appointed.
Do George, Rove, and Cheney think we are blind?
Sure he knows alot about the "war on terror".
O.M.G.
Truth:
IMHO, the Gates thing is part of a larger effort by the national security establishment to cut junior out of the loop and to put in the "A-Team" (by their lights, which are not necessarily all dim-bulbs) to try and rescue a disaster. Gates is Bush Sr. / Brent Scowcroft / Good Soldier all the way. They are in deep damage-control mode, to my mind, and I mean damage in the sense of damage to our vital national interests as they see it. Sow the wind....
Chuck in Houston
Lame-duck George Jr. = George Sr. begging dems to let by-gones be by-gones and to please don't do unto us as we did unto you because it will be a disaster for everyone, and that, to my mind, is US international and domestic politics for the next two year. And that, to my mind, is an improvement over what we've had to endure for the past six years. Let's see how this unfolds.
Chuck in Houston
And, of course, the second they escape disaster they will pin the blame on someone else and be back on our throats again. If we let that happen, that is.
Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice... I won't get fooled again.
Isn't that a "Who" song? Help me out on that monkey!
Chuck in Houston (nee "Baku")
Lyrics from "The Who," you know, Peter Townsend, Roger Daltrey, Keith Moon, et al....:
We'll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that's all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain't changed
'Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
No, no!
I'll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half alive
I'll get all my papers and smile at the sky
Though I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do ya?
There's nothing in the streets
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are replaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Are now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
Chuck in Houston
PS: I don't necesarily ascribe to all of the sentiments that may be imputed to the above, but it is a good song.
"I would love to hear what Andree in France would make of all of this."
~~Posted by: Chuck at November 10, 2006 12:24 AM
I thought about her all day yesterday, wondering if she'd pop in and post her thoughts. Vokoban was over at the JK blog the other day. :-)
Yes, Poppy's Men are set to take the reins. Wonder how Bab's and her Beautiful Mind are doing these days.
Nancy Pelosi is an Ace. Had a chance to see/hear her at the Women Revolution thingy in Boston and thought she was an absolute force of nature. Go, Nancy. Also think she will be smart enough to listen to newcomers like Webb and McCaskill to learn how to reach into the previously written-off areas of the country and find out just what makes up the concerns of the rural voters.
For far too long the concerns of rural and midwest/south voters have been either stoked with fearmongering by the right wing or pandered too with long, involved, jargon-phrased academic speak by the left.
These people aren't stupid. They just don't have time for lattes and the internet because they're working two jobs and the kids have games and they don't have healthcare so they're working on the side for their chiro to trade out services and get some vitamins at cost.
People hear listen to Lou Dobbs. They like Lou Dobbs. They think Lou Dobbs is the only person today who gives two cents about their lives.
Webb and McCaskill got that. Maybe Washington will get it too.
And these people-- just barely-- gave the Dems control of the Senate. We treat them to the party, or loss them in two years.
a perspective similar to Jeffrey Lewis (see
Posted by: karen at November 9, 2006 04:36 PM), but from the Democratic side:
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/11/10/the_democratic_center/
introductory paragraphs. . .
The Democratic center
By Paul Waldman | November 10, 2006
CONSERVATIVES searching desperately for a silver lining in the cloud of Tuesday's defeats have tried to argue that Democrats only won because they ran conservative candidates. And they've gotten support from key members of the mainstream news media.
"These Democrats that were elected last night are conservative Democrats," said CBS's Bob Schieffer the morning after. "The Democrats' victory was built on the back of more centrist candidates seizing Republican-leaning districts," said The Washington Post. The press is busy preparing portraits of those moderate Democrats who may be pro life or pro gun, to demonstrate that they are the face of a new Democratic Party, one that won by becoming more like their opponents.
Coming from media that never tire of telling us that America is a fundamentally conservative country, it isn't too surprising to hear. But it's just not true.
. . . . .
and conclusion:
So, despite what the press and pundits seem to believe, Democrats did not win by moving to the center; they won because at the moment, they are the center. According to exit polls, independents voted Democratic by 57 to 39 percent. And those describing themselves as "moderates" voted Democratic by an even wider margin, 61 to 38 percent.
Even in places where more moderate Democrats won, it reflected fundamental shifts away from the right. Jim Webb won election to the Senate in Virginia because the state is moving from red to purple, as population in the more Democratic Northern Virginia suburbs has exploded. Democratic victories in states like Montana and Colorado came not because of conservative candidates but because independents and moderates have become alienated from a GOP dominated by its Southern social conservatives.
For years, the news media have told us that Republican victories showed they were the party of the "mainstream," where "real" Americans found their home. But now it is the Democratic Party that appears to occupy the center ground. It didn't happen because they changed their opinions on issues or turned their backs on their traditional base of support. With control of the White House and the Congress, the Republicans had every opportunity to implement their conservative vision in both foreign and domestic policy. The public repudiated that vision, and in the process left the GOP a smaller tent than it had been. As we assess what this election means for the future of the parties and for future elections, we might want to reevaluate what constitutes the "center" in American politics.
Putting Rahm Emanuel in his place…
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2671649
As referenced yesterday by the Bubbameister ...
Key Republican joins Dems in opposing Bolton
This is probably not what President Bush had in mind when he stressed bipartisanship after the Democratic Party's midterm elections sweep. A key Senate Republican has joined Democrats in opposing one of Bush's initiatives for the lame-duck Congress: John Bolton's nomination as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
Chafee, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, told reporters that he did not believe Bolton's nomination would move forward without his support.
"The American people have spoken out against the president's agenda on a number of fronts, and presumably one of those is on foreign policy," the Rhode Island moderate told The Associated Press.
"And at this late stage in my term, I'm not going to endorse something the American people have spoke out against."
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/10/bolton.congress/index.html
The vindication of Howard Dean's 'crazy' strategy
RAW STORY
Thursday November 9, 2006
Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean, the former presidential candidate who was once in danger of being remembered for an angry scream, has come full circle. Dean's "crazy strategy of rebuilding the Democratic Party across all states" helped the Democrats achieve success as they captured Congress in the midterm elections, writes Joe Conason at Salon.
"Only weeks after the Democratic National Committee chose Howard Dean as its chairman last year, the nasty whispers began to circulate around Washington and among longtime party donors and activists in cities from New York to Los Angeles," writes Conason. "'He's going to be a disaster,' they muttered. 'He can't raise any money. He doesn't know what he's doing. And what does he mean by this crazy 50-state strategy?'"
Despite his struggles with power brokers in a party he was selected to lead, Dean persevered and is now "enjoying vindication far earlier than he ever expected," the article says.
"What Dean and his organizers created ... was an environment that allowed insurgents and outliers as well as the party's chosen challengers to ride the national wave of revulsion against conservative rule," Conason writes. "Faced with many more viable challenges than anticipated, the Republicans made mistakes in allocating resources -- and were forced to defend candidates in districts that are usually safe."
Conason says that Dean has "reached a peaceful accommodation" with his party adversaries, in part motivated by his popularity among the "unruly netroots." While deliberation over the continuance of the 50-state strategy will continue, Dean has in the meantime "won the argument" he initiated in the planning for this year's midterm.
"There would have been much less for the Democrats to celebrate on Election Night," concludes Conason, "if Howard Dean hadn't been so 'crazy' -- and so persistent."
Excerpts from the adview-required article follow...
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/The_vindication_of_Howard_Deans_crazy_1109.html
Hey CHUCK!!!!! :)
Boxer pledges shift on global warming policy
Incoming Senate environmental chair say 'time is running out'
SACRAMENTO, Calif. - Sen. Barbara Boxer on Thursday promised major policy shifts on global warming, air quality and toxic-waste cleanup as she prepares to lead the U.S. Senate's environmental committee.
"Time is running out, and we need to move forward on this," Boxer said of global warming during a conference call with reporters. "The states are beginning to take steps, and we need to take steps as well."
Boxer's elevation to chairwoman of the Senate Environmental Public Works Committee comes as Democrats return to power in the Senate. It also marks a dramatic shift in ideology for the panel.
more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15652004/
I'm hearing the latest frames from the media:
1. Democrats are going to screw things up by taking on too many things at once.
2. Democrats will waste money on hearings.
3. The corrupt Republicans were really Democrats.
4. Bush is working towards bipartisonship. If the Democrats hold hearings the bipartisonship will disppear.
5. There is a divide between conservative Democrats and liberal Democrats so they won't be effective.
The Republican Party is doomed...
Read it here (and on DailyKos)
http://www.myleftwing.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=6ED4AA6EAF1FA4DACC59AB676B0F0C64?diaryId=12820
Sparrow
I'm being selective who I listen to. So far I have heard Murtha and Webb. I need to let what they said sink in. I don't think there's going to be a unified position because the Democratic party is a big tent now. I think alot of nonsense will be written in the next few weeks because nobody expected the Democrats to take both the House and the Senate. When there are about as many Independents as Democrats and Republicans, it's really not surprising that people didn't listen so much to the quiet middle (like the old "silent majority") but to the much louder left and right ends of the spectrum. Now I'll bet there will be a big fight to control the middle (think McCain, H Clinton etc).
I'm still sitting back with my popcorn, watching
The media has no crystal ball. I have been talking to young people and one asked me, "Did the Democrats take over ALL the seats in the House and Senate?" So the media isn't doing a very good job of informing people or getting them interested.
Posted by: sparrow at November 10, 2006 11:47 AM
"F" em... I say we turn our sites on the media next. Talk is cheap, and if this new majority is smart, and I think it is, it will let their actions do the talking, without being muddled by a bunch of corporate-driven tabloid tested bullshit.
Let the media frame it anyway they want, right now their rantings appear as rediculous as the currently disgraced regime and it's minions.
Indeed, the air feels less oppressive out here already.
Americuz
These people aren't stupid. They just don't have time for lattes and the internet because they're working two jobs .... KJ
I read the MyLeftWing thing - yes the Republicans have lost support by not upholding their standard of being fiscally conservative but if the Republicans organize more toward the center, they are still a threat. American politics has always moved cyclically. The center of gravity if usually in the middle and the left and right tend to cancel each other out. When it goes too far to the left for middle America (as after Vietnam) or to far to the right for middle America (as after 9/11), it cycles back to the middle.
The Republican party is far from doomed. I have lived too long to believe that. There are always budding Roves and Atwaters. Make no mistake.
Posted by: dwahzon at November 10, 2006 08:46 AM
I like what Kos has to say about all this...
Taking a bow
--snip--
Those who think that the DSCC and DCCC don't deserve credit are idiots. Those who think Dean doesn't deserve credit are idiots. Those who think the netroots and grassroots don't deserve credit are idiots. We all had our roles to play, and we wouldn't be where we are today without them.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/10/11335/627
Posted by: DiAnne at November 10, 2006 12:00 PM
I agree. And sometimes corruption swings both ways too and will pull a party down.
Posted by: monkey at November 10, 2006 11:58 AM
I didn't hear "media reform" in Nancy Pelosi's first hundred days address. I would have put it there. Same as election reform.
I hope as well that they make DC a state. (While they can!)
Somebody just reassure me that they learned their lesson!
Also, the more I read about Emanuel and Reid and Shumer the more worried I am about what they are going to do for us.
Posted by: sparrow at November 10, 2006 12:22 PM
Media reform is more up to us than it is the government. It's more about money. We can have an impact on making or breaking the media.
I know there are things you'd expect the government to do, but let's do all we can as consumers so that our newly elected government can prioritize & focus on the biggest issues in the first 100 days.
Also, RE: media reform - plan to attend the National Conference for Media Reform in Nashville in January 2007. I went to the 2005 one in St. Louis & highly recommend it.
http://freepress.net/conference/
Posted by: sparrow at November 10, 2006 12:25 PM
You're going to make yourself crazy if you don't stop worrying & give them a chance. It has been only 3 days from the election & already you're working yourself up.
I know that I'll never agree 100% with any elected official or person in power, but I'm willing to give them a chance to prove themselves via their actions, not just their words.
Sparrow, Kay and others that worked with the Ohio Democratic Party, hopefully are aware that the media has given very little attention to the seismic shift in the political structure of Ohio, and why we at the dcp need to continue to push Ohio towards real democratic election and party reform BEFORE the 2008 presidential race. All of their leadership now has our ear, we need to keep pressure on them to usher in reform b/w now and 2008. Not only did Ted Strickland and Sherrod Brown win by large margins, but Lee Fisher is their new Lt governor and more importantly Marc Dann won their A.G. race and Jennifer Bruner now replaces Ken Blackwell as Secy of State. Dann has already promised in the Cleveland Plain Dealer that one of his highest priorities will be "integrity in elections and an end to corruption in their election process." Since Ohio will most likely be ground zero again for the Presidential election, election reform needs to be a high priority after ethics and economic policies especially in Ohio.
These are some of the problems I observed and certainly kay and sparrow can add to my list:
1. Photo I.D.s were required of all voters even those with current voter registration cards although electric bills accepted. That created problems for the elderly and poor with neither;
2. Cayahoga Cty set out to hire 7500 new election judge assisants and technicians to cover 650 precincts unfortunaly they fell short because they started looking for workers in late September when I first got there rather than in January to give them sufficient time;That was a noble gestture on their part but poorly planned;
3. Cayahoga Cty hired 200 workers to help Nursing Home residents,senior centers and cty jail inmates and hospital patients absentee vote. That was an amazing gesture but far too few workers were hired to cover the 150 nursing homes and senior centers alone in Cleveland.
4. I believe that Diebolt was still their voting machine operator. They still don't have optical scanners or a paper print out like other states;
5. Several of their precincts opened 1-2 hours late and the Ohio Democratic Party was required to go to federal court to keep them open. Blackwell urged and succeeded in making votes b/w 7-9 in these polling precincts to count as provisional ballots even though not the fault of voters;
6. The Ohio Democratic party used a computer data entry system called SAGE which was extremely slow, antiquated and non operational for a considerable time during the campaign and desperatly needs replacement;
7. The Ohio Democratic voter list and phone numbers had not been updated for several years.
8. Voters who had not voted in the previous 2 election cycles were purged off the rolls and new registration cards not mailed out;
9. Acorn and other progressive voter registration groups were given draconian penalties for turning in new voter registration cards that needs to be rescinded.
10. Absentee application were sent out to everyone in Cayahoga Cty, except to residents in nursing homes, and unfortunately free postage was not provided on the absentee applications;
And finally Gene Schmidt needs to be defeated in 2008 by Paul Hackett.
We have a new team of ethical and dynamic leaders in Ohio. Lets not forget to let them know that their work is just beginning and that we expect massive fair election laws to be enacted in Ohio by the 2008 Presidential election and that members of the dcp will be reminding them of that. We should also praise these new group of Ohio leaders as we see some of these reforms instituted to let them know that dcp members appreciate real election reform, but please don't take Ohio for granted ever again. It took over a decade to wrestle it away from the corrupt Ohio Republican party.
I told my mother this morning WE ARE NOT DONE, just because we won the house and the Seante does not make us done, we still have to pay close attention to what our representives are doing, we can not take everything they say on faith anymore than we could with the Republicans in control we have to be vigilant I do not want to become them. Saying they said(those in power)I want to still read research and watch. Winning isnt everything its what the winner does with the win that counts.
Fantastic Planet Of Love
Marshall Crenshaw
The way you smile, even when heartbreak
Is closing in around you
You know that's one thing
I ought to learn how to do
Won't you hear my plea
Come by and see me
'Cause every time I see you smile
You make my world
A fantastic planet of love
What new battle will this day bring?
Just this morning I felt like trouble's plaything
Believe me darling this is true
It's only when I'm next to you, that I ever dream of
A fantastic planet of love
Right now I feel it
I feel something closing in around me
It's in the headlines of the tabloids
And I heard it on TV
Come see about me, can't wait to be
Hanging 'round with the one who makes my world
A fantastic planet of love
Don't get angry
Yeah, that's what you say!
Save your anger, you shouldn't look at it that way
Come over and I'll be satisfied
It's only when I'm by your side
That I ever dream of
A fantastic planet of love
Posted by: monkey at November 10, 2006 01:36 PM
Love it. ;=)
As always, my comments return to voting.
More on CIA Director/Iran Contra/Rumsfield replacement, Robert Gates. According to Bev Harris at BBV, he was director of a voting machine company.
Gates was on the board of directors of VoteHere, a strange, small company that was the biggest elections industry lobbyist for the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). VoteHere spent more money than ES&S, Diebold, and Sequoia combined to help ram HAVA through. And HAVA, of course, was a bill
sponsored by convicted Abramoff co-hort, Bob Ney, and K-street lobbyist, Steny Hoyer.
sparrow:
I appreciate your concern and caution, but defarge is right. Let our new leaders settle in.
What we can REALLY use right now is continued pressure to make sure the current 109th COngress DOES NOT pull a fast one before they leave in December. We need to watch every single last move they make. Remember opposition parties love to leave little time bombs for the new party in power to come upon and blow themselves up.
Put nervous energy into present moment alertness.
AND DON'T EVER STOP. EVEN AFTER THE NEW CONGRESS IS SWORN IN.
I agree we have to keep up pressure for media reform, election reform including campaign finance reform. Fairness. I doubt Pelosi will do it because she will have to build bridges in order to get things done. I also agree very much that we have to be vigilant about the current Congress (til 2007) trying to sneak things through quickly as lame ducks. I personally am not that concerned if the country seems to have gone somewhat to the middle because I think that's where the country actually is, if you average it. It's historically true too. Doesn't mean we personally have to be middle-of-the-road.
Read this, sparrow. I hope it will make you feel a little better...
The new media narrative
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/10/13731/592
Good things are starting to happen already...
DEMOCRATS WILL REVISIT MILITARY HABEAS DEBATE
Likely Chair Leahy Objects to Limits on Detainees' Rights
WASHINGTON - An effort to restore habeas corpus rights for enemy combatants could be the first test of the Democrats' resolve to change course in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, who is expected to become chairman, confirmed Thursday that he is drafting a bill to undo portions of a recently passed law that prevent terrorism detainees from going to federal court to challenge the government's right to hold them indefinitely.
http://pda-appellateblog.blogspot.com/2006_11_01_pda-appellateblog_archive.html#116317805789890859
87% THINK BUSH SHOULD BE IMPEACHED!
Do you believe President Bush's actions justify impeachment? * 319172 responses
Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.
87%
No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching "high crimes and misdemeanors."
4.4%
No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.
7.2%
I don't know.
1.8%
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/
I know what Dean said, at this point to hell with Dean too.
EIGHTY SEVEN PERCENT.
There is no reason at all to wait.
Prosecute him and set an example to the world.
It is our only way out of this.
87%!!!!!!!!!
Now I am celebrating!!! May the will of the PEOPLE be done!
Posted by: Christy at November 10, 2006 03:28 PM
You think you're celebrating now....
Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse
A lawsuit in Germany will seek a criminal prosecution of the outgoing Defense Secretary and other U.S. officials for their alleged role in abuses at Abu Ghraib and Gitmo
By ADAM ZAGORIN
Friday, Nov. 10, 2006
Just days after his resignation, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is about to face more repercussions for his involvement in the troubled wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. New legal documents, to be filed next week with Germany's top prosecutor, will seek a criminal investigation and prosecution of Rumsfeld, along with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, former CIA director George Tenet and other senior U.S. civilian and military officers, for their alleged roles in abuses committed at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison and at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The plaintiffs in the case include 11 Iraqis who were prisoners at Abu Ghraib, as well as Mohammad al-Qahtani, a Saudi held at Guantanamo, whom the U.S. has identified as the so-called "20th hijacker" and a would-be participant in the 9/11 hijackings. As TIME first reported in June 2005, Qahtani underwent a "special interrogation plan," personally approved by Rumsfeld, which the U.S. says produced valuable intelligence. But to obtain it, according to the log of his interrogation and government reports, Qahtani was subjected to forced nudity, sexual humiliation, religious humiliation, prolonged stress positions, sleep deprivation and other controversial interrogation techniques.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs say that one of the witnesses who will testify on their behalf is former Brig. Gen. Janis Karpinski, the one-time commander of all U.S. military prisons in Iraq. Karpinski — who the lawyers say will be in Germany next week to publicly address her accusations in the case — has issued a written statement to accompany the legal filing, which says, in part: "It was clear the knowledge and responsibility [for what happened at Abu Ghraib] goes all the way to the top of the chain of command to the Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld ."
more...
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1557842,00.html
George W. Bush must be tried in a court of THIS nation and no other. It is our responsibility and ours alone, God forgive us.
I think we should give over Rummy to be tried in IRAQ.
Thank you everyone for trying to cheer me up. I guess all this backstabbing between all these people has depressed me.
Madame, thank you for the kos link. It did cheer me up. But this one cheered me up even more:
DEMOCRATS WILL REVISIT MILITARY HABEAS DEBATE
and this one too:
Exclusive: Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse
I worried that the first one would be forgotten out of some sort of 08 fear.
And the second one is great news because we need to get testimony and hold these people accountable for their evil actions.
Maybe my outlook on those issues was changed a little bit by helping so much with Jesselyn Radack's book and seeing her experience with her own 'Inspector Javeer.' But it really hit me hard on how much our government went after one person and how the layers and layers of cover-ups exist out there in many areas--not just with the area Jesselyn Radack worked in--but all across this administration.
I'm glad to know those issues aren't forgotten in the 'glory of the moment.' AND I'm dying to know what Debbie Stabenow will vote for now we've taken Congress.
I'd also like to know what the heck happened that 3 days after a wonderful cleansing of facism, I hear all this garbage about DCCC, DSC, Netroots, etc.. all congratulating themselves or blaming others for everything this election!
People dissing Seals and Duckworth and calling them "Milqueweed" or people going after Dean's neck.
WTF people?
Just WTF!!!
A military hero and a DNC Chairman who just brought the democratic party out of the wilderness to one of its greatest victories in a generation, and we attack these folks? That is insanity. I agree that some of our candidates did not possess all the politicial skills needed to handle a campaign but why would that justify criticism? As you recall many, many progressives attacked the choice of Sherrod Brown over Paul Hackett claiming he was not a real Democrat b/c his positions were not pure enough and that he would have no chance against Mike Dewine. Last time I checked he cleaned Dewine's clock by an overwhelming 15% margin. Schummer, Dean and others at the DNC were roundly criticized for supporting Brown over Hackett and were threatened by those who claim they would not support Brown. Brown turned out to be a fine candidate who had the money and political skills that Paul Hackett, a great progressive candidate did not. I think that what this has taught us is that politics is a serious business that is often best served by those like McKasill, Casey and Brown who have been in the political trenches before and have the training to run against the Republican slime machine. That does not mean that Hackett should not run in '08 against Schmidt, it just means that the odds of their success are less than those of candidates who have fought the good political fight before.
In Harris's district they are having a problem with the votes. Apparently, over 18,000 voters didn't vote for Congress but came out to vote for fire chief or whatever.
The campaign heard from voters that the final screen was not showing their vote for the Democrat. This tipped them off.
I heard this on Randi Rhodes.
Posted by: DiAnne at November 10, 2006 12:00 PM
I have to catch up on the reading, but scrolling up I saw your comment to me. I haven't read the MyLeft Wing thing, so I'll have to comment again once I do, LOL
Spent the day in urban KC. Was that nice for a change. Also a friend brought up a topic that I just posted on Ron's blog, re: locations of polling places. Now to go read WTF Sparrow is WTFing about. What happened today? Nevermind, will go read.