Liberal Blogger Targets ‘Bush Dog’ Dems
A leading liberal blogger has declared political war against centrist Democrats - the latest move in an intensifying show of dissatisfaction with the Democratic Congress by the once-friendly blogosphere.
Matt Stoller, who blogs at the well-trafficked OpenLeft.com, has compiled a list of 38 House “Blue Dog” Democrats who have voted with Republicans on key legislation, and called on the activist community to put pressure on them - and perhaps challenge them in primaries - if they fail to shape up.
“Some of these members may need to face a primary challenge, and it’s useful for potential primary challengers to know that there is criticism of these members,” wrote Stoller, who refers to the 38 Democrats as “Bush Dogs.”
Stoller said he would give the Democratic Congress a near-failing grade so far. He is particularly upset with Democrats who joined Republicans in supporting legislation expanding the administration’s surveillance capabilities and for not pushing hard enough for a time-certain Iraq withdrawal.
“They are going to be very methodical in this first stage,” said Conn Carroll, author of the Hotline’s Blogometer, of the Netroots. “I’d be very surprised if they end up targeting more than two or three people on the list. But just by identifying people, they’re able to move a lot of these Democrats to the left.”
Stoller’s criticism reflects growing dissatisfaction from within the Democratic base with their party’s performance. The latest Gallup poll gives Congress an 18 percent approval rating, matching an all-time low.
And the drop in congressional approval comes almost entirely because of declining support from Democratic voters. Only 21 percent of Democrats approved of Congress’ performance - an 11-point drop in the last month alone.
But the desire to target members who have largely been voting in line with their constituencies puzzles many Democratic operatives.
Many of the targeted Democrats - 15 of the 38 by Politico’s count - will likely be facing highly competitive reelection campaigns. Nearly all of them represent solidly Republican districts that President Bush carried handily in 2004.
“To truly reverse the damage the Bush administration has done will take electing more Democrats, not challenging the ones that have won very tough districts,” said one Democratic strategist.
One of Stoller’s potential targets, Rep. Melissa Bean (D-Ill.), has won reelection in a conservative-leaning suburban Chicago district.
The Chicago Tribune reported yesterday that many of her freshman Democratic colleagues are looking to emulate her centrist voting record and close attention to local issues in their reelection bids.
That news angers Stoller, who argues that Bean has betrayed the Democrats who helped elect her in the first place.
“Melissa Bean is a bad legislator, and she does things that keep us in Iraq, destroy the Constitution, and deserves criticism for that. She certainly doesn’t deserve to be emulated,” he said.
The war in Iraq has ignited much of the liberal base’s discontent. Over the last several weeks, several Democrats in targeted races have softened their position on the war, fueling even more outrage from the left.
Just one month ago, Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-Fla.) told his local newspaper that the choice was not “whether” to stage a drawdown of U.S. forces deployed in Iraq, but “how.” Now, he says the surge “has really made a difference and really has gotten al Qaeda on their heels.”
Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.), who ran an anti-war campaign to an upset victory in a conservative Bay Area district, acknowledged after returning from Iraq that he is “willing to negotiate with the generals in Iraq over just how much more time they might need.”
But after taking flak from his liberal base, McNerney clarified his position on his blog: “I am firmly in favor of withdrawing troops on a timeline that includes both a definite start date and a definite end date.”
TM & © THE POLITICO & POLITICO.COM
I’d be interested to see how the list of Dems who’ve changed their tune on the war dovetais with the list of Dems who’ve recently visited Israel on a junket sponsored by the Israel Lobby.
I am extremely disgusted with the Dems. If they’re not “owned” by the Israelis, they’re “owned” by the Corporatists. As a friend of mine often says, “There’s really only one Party, with two right wings.”
IMHO, that applies to Hillary, Obama and Edwards. Would that it weren’t so!!
No taxation without representation!
Won’t get fooled again…
JasonJones
That was a very well written and well thought-out position. Thank you for your comments. I agree with most of what you stated however the reason I believe the democrats have appeared and are weak is bit more pragmatic.
1) The MSM always attacks the democratic party for the smallest of peccadilloes while the republicans are constantly given free passes for murders, bribes, obstructing justice and any and all crimes against humanity.
2) The democrats really do not even control the senate it is 49-49 with 2 independents one being Lieberman (who is really a repuke). They have a very small margin in the house. So they really do not have that much power.
3) The new democrats that won in 2006 were for the most part very conservative democrats or they would not have won the election.
4) Change in politics takes place painfully slowly. Additionally the MSM coupled with the jibber-jabber on talk radio and fox news are constantly misstating and obstructing any changes the democrats are trying to make.
5) Frankly I think they have done a very fine job under the circumstances, can you even imagine all the criminal activities that they are trying to sort out in the six year the repukes had control. It must be totally overwhelming. Additionally the bush repukes gave themselves more vacations, more raises and simply rubberstamped the bush administrations policies.
So do not be sucked into the MSM criticism of this congress at least not yet. I agree we need to pressure them to be more active in bringing the criminals to justice and we need to make our social and political platforms loudly known. Perhaps some should be replaced. However, we should be spending most of our time making sure none of the repukes ever get elected again and investigate and prosecute their criminal activites.
Finally, I have noticed since the democrats gained this small toehold on congress a lot more people speaking out against the most corrupt aberration of democracy that has ever transpired (the bush administration) and that is a good thing.
Freedom Loving American,
Good analysis. Sometimes the public thinks Congress can act instantly, if they knew how the system really works (and was designed to work) they would know why it takes so long. Also having a slim majority puts you in charge, but does not give you much power.
The power comes with an overwhelming majority. Plus the ability to override a Presidential Veto.
As long as I can remember (since the 1950’s) the conservative Democrates (mostly from the South) have always caused the Democratic Party defeat.
Impeach the Vichy Democrats.
It’s not hard.. your choice in these conservative districts. Conservative democrats who will vote with the rest of the party sometimes, or a republican.
I simply withdrew my monthly support to the Democratic Party when they allowed the Surge. I will not begin that support again until we are out of Iraq and Bush is neutralized on Iran.
I too have been disappointed with the Congress so far. I thought that when the Democrats won majorities that things would start to happen. The reality is that with such slim majorities that they can not do anything without the help of the Republicans. Maybe if the Democrats wouldn’t point their fingers at the Republicans and point just at Bush/Cheney, then it would give the Republicans wiggle room to start changing their position on the war. Remember, Democrats, as well as Republicans voted to authorize Bush to go to war. Both sides are to blame for the mess we are in. I say give the Republicans wiggle room to get out of the corner that Bush/Cheney have gotten them into. The only way to get out of this mess is for both parties to work together.
first of all, these so-called “conservatives” are NOT thoughtful, intelligently conservative. they are reactionaries or rightwing toadies or ignorant. baird was not in the matt renner article on blue dog democrats published by truthout on 10 august. i have a congressional directory, and i send rather nasty, finger-waving emails to the likes of melissa bean and others who have email addresses. you could be of divine origins, but once you get elected, it’s new territory. the sharks are cruising, and they are trying to compromise you in some way. but the overall moral decadence, outright ignorance, and the sleaziness of this rightwing pro-business at all costs congress will be slow to change if not enough voters get the word. that really is the key: an enlightened electorate. i look upon bill clinton as an interesting case. although he never claimed to be a liberal progressive, he knew enough about the FDR legacy to have advanced it. but if he ever had any liberal convictions, he lacked the courage to act on them. his sexual obsessions seemed to have occupied his mind and his time. i look upon his terms largely as a wasted opportunity. it set up the terms by which rove, et al. could easily hoodwink the all-too-willing dupes who voted for this manchurian candidate-like boob now loitering in the White House. Keerist, it’s painful to
see what these swine have done in the last 6-plus years!!
What exactly is the point of electing “Democrats” that haold the same twisted views and vote exactly like the Bush Neocons?
Might be a better stategy for anti war dems to just vote for anti war traditional conservative Republicans instead to geting into a pissing match over party nominations.
The problem is that we have two parties in this country, the Money Party and the People Party. There are waaay more Money politicians than People politicians. The Republicans, as far as I can tell, are all part of the Money Party. Unfortunately the Dems have their share of Money Party politicians, too. Don’t know what the answer is outside of publicly financing elections.
canuckchuck:
“What exactly is the point of electing “Democrats” that hold the same twisted views and vote exactly like the Bush Neocons?”
I agree. Except. Once the primaries are over and I’m faced with a “choice” of a conservative Democrat or a conservative Repug, I’ll go with the Dem. At least with them I get crumbs. With the Repugs all I get is a finger in the face telling me what a traitor I am and why do I hate America?
As far as I can see there is very little difference between the two political parties. They are both more interested in making the other party look bad that doing the people’s business. Both parties are the Money Party.
They just have different ideas on how to “trickle down” enough to the masses to keep the masses happy.
I used to be a big Democratic Party supporter. Now I see less & less difference between the two parties. I just wish they would sit down together & start addressing the people’s business. I won’t hold my breath though.
It’s what you call a sticky wicket. The way I understand it the dems need some conservative dems to be a majority. Because the majority controls commitee’s and can subpoene. I know, I can’t spell, I digress. So it looks like the dems will have to be strategic in challenging incumbent dems. I hate to say that. Doesn’t seem right. But there it is.
And let’s get one thing straight. Their are very few liberals left in politics. Everything shifted to the right when Reagan came along. So let’s stop calling these conservatives “moderate”. For example. Hillary ain’t no liberal. She ain’t no moderate, she’s a conservative. Obama and Edwards, they’d be your moderates. What are called conervatives now days are Fascists. Look it up in the dictionary. I hope I’ve cleared that up for everyone. Your pal, Tom A.
Tom:
“Everything shifted to the right when Reagan came along.”
Yup. And with everything moving to the right when someone says “centrist” they really mean “still to the right”. It’s all relative.
A more depictive decription of the “reagan years” would be the first bush administraion. Things make more sense when viewed that way.
I agree with Blogger Stoller and his bulletin is exactly what we Americans need. More has to be done. What I am wondering with all the discontent these days is where are the colossal protestors? In the seventies when great throngs of almost anarchist renegades had huge music festivals protesting the Vietnam war, huge parades, sit-ins, etc., they made a difference. Campuses were hotbeds of rebellion. And they made a difference. But today, when the Bush War is just as evil, if not more evil, though we don’t really know the real motivations for Vietnam, but whatever, the present war is killing hundreds of thousands of people and we hear nary a peep.
What has happened to the radical young? The insightful middle-class who are always getting screwed by the federal government? Where are the songwriters like Bob Dylan, Joan Baez, Pete Seeger, Barry McGuire, and Woody Guthrie, where are those like the Chicago Seven, or the Berrigan Brothers, Jane Fondas, John Kerrys, John Lennons. What is happening at Berkeley? They seem so lame regarding the Iraq wars. Why is not stuff happening? Where are our brave?
There was a draft during Vietnam. If we had a draft today (and I’m not advocating one), young people would be far more engaged.
If the Democratic party were a family pet, it would be a prime candidate for euthanization.
What we need in this country is a two-party system.
thomas j hussey August 24th, 2007 7:42 pm
If the Democratic party were a family pet, it would be a prime candidate for euthanization.
What we need in this country is a two-party system.
What we need in this country is a parliamentary system. Bush would already be gone on a vote of no confidence. The current system with its endless, issueless campaigning and its installation of complete bought-and-paid-for nitwits on a semi-permanent basis is the furthest thing from democracy I can imagine.
A draft is in the wind so I hear from the media. Perhaps it’s just the hot fart air coming from the Executive Branch with everyone making a fast exit?? But I think you are perfectly right Frosty bunny. Too bad, but I remember those wonderful and brave draft burning parties and all the guys running to Canada. And Bill Clinton with his big hair running to England to be a Rhodes scholar. Yup, there is no legacy of protest alive right now. And I do not advocate a draft either. That’s all the Rethugs would need to invade Iran.
thomas j if you want a two party system then raise your politicians from the dead! And I think it’s time to let Reagan die for good.
Can I assume that pelosi and reid are bluedogs then?They have the power to bring bills up or not,as they choose.The repubs would not hesitate to filibuster and the dems just sit on their hands or give in to the repubs.What could the blue dogs due if there were no bills to vote on?The dems are afraid and that is the point and unless there is change I’ll do like the Brazillians did and vote in a hippo.We are not that far from a fascist takeover and we do not have that much time.The repubs could because there was a much more semblence of a democracy.Tony
If you are from MN, do you know that our recently elected “progressive” Senator Amy Klobuchar voted for the FISA bill? If she is your representative that she needs to know what you think about her performance
http://klobuchar.senate.gov/
Fool US once,shame on Bush; fool US twice, shame on DEM! We the People simply aren’t taking any LYING CRAP from the DEM jackasses, either! Gotta GO!!
A list of core Bush Dogs is as follows:
Jason Altmire, PA-04
Brian Baird, WA-03 (he didn’t vote for FISA, but he just switched his position and now supports the surge)
John Barrow, GA-12
Melissa Bean, IL-08
Dan Boren, OK-02
Leonard Boswell, IA-03
Alan Boyd, FL-02
Chris Carney, PA-10
Ben Chandler, KY-06
Jim Cooper, TN-05
Jim Costa, CA-20
Bud Cramer, AL-05
Henry Cuellar, TX-28
Lamar Davis, TN-04
Joe Donnelly, IN-02
Chet Edwards, TX-17
Brad Ellsworth, IN-08
Bob Etheridge, NC-02
Bart Gordon, TN-06
Stephanie Herseth, SD-AL
Baron Hill, IN-09
Nick Lampson, TX-22
Dan Lipinski, IL-03
Jim Marshall, GA-08
Jim Matheson, UT-02
Mike McIntyre, NC-07
Charlie Melancon, LA-03
Colin Peterson, MN-07
Earl Pomeroy, ND-AL
Ciro Rodriguez, TX-23
Mike Ross, AR-04
John Salazar, CO-03
Heath Shuler, NC-11
Vic Snyder, AR-02
Zack Space, OH-18
John Tanner, TN-08
Gene Taylor, MS-04
Tim Walz, MN-01
Charlie Wilson, OH-06
Blue Dog Dems make me sick. They are Demo-registered Pubs…tHEY SUPPORT THEMSELVES AND GWB.
It takes time for Dems to get all the JUNK that GWB has created out in the open, but time IS running short.
I think John Edwards would make a good Democrat President.
Brian Baird is my Congressman and I have been all over him for some of his votes. He knows my views. The trouble is there is never any primary challenger and the Republicans they run against him are complete idiots. Baird did keep his word to our group of activists when we demanded a meeting with him concerning liquefied natural gas speculators trying to establish a facility in the beautiful and endangered Columbia River, but since the election, none of the Dems who promised help in repealing Dick Cheney’s Energy Policy Act of 2005 has stepped to the plate to give states back the right of locating these monstrosities within their borders. Next election, I’m voting for the candidate with the most balls.
We all know what happens when we let someone else watch out for us….and its our own fault, country wide. With folks like this guy, we might be able to breed a better politician. It might take us all to break the backs of these fools and “be” more of their environment than their “but…?” buddies and assorted cronies that lead them into making our “hell” for us.
Redumbocratans! I don’t care! One or the other. If their morals can bring them to suffer and on to hell then they fuck up, then they might be a good candidate, one with a conscience. We must make sure they will feel the power of the people, so they know they better not mess with the us the public! That is your job and mine. Now who owns us? Don’t vote for statistics or you might become one, vote with your heart and you might grow one. Balls nothing! Think how many Hillary has. Try honesty!
Here we go, if you don’t like certain democrats then vote for a different democrat: a differeent democrat whose party is funded by the same people as are the Republicans.
I am so sick and tired of the damn apologist who constantly say if only, if only we kicked every damn Republican and Democrat out of office and then outlawed the tow partys who have completly criminalized our electorzl and Representative fform of government then and only then could voting once again mean anything.
These damn stuck in the party want you to continue with more of the same because they are afraid tyhey won’t have the control or mostly they are so stuck in thehmud and ghave grown afraid of change they no longer can think out of a party mold.
It is the partys in power Democrat those who claim to be independent and the Republicans bakced all by the same corproate metnality and no mater whom b elieve every damn problem can be solved by that governemtn they suck off of.
Sorry about mispelled words but damn it no elected official today can so much as pee without irst determining if the party will let him do it and when they ant to pee the elected are there to unzip and hold it for them.
Party bloggers , wht and the hell is a party blogger but just a mouthpiece for one minor faction within the same damn grouping of paid for votes elected offficials.
Both partys now apy stooges to go online and save the party.
All the while the Democrats promise this or that and what they promise is to help set up a society so that Corporate America gets off scott free and the people pay for their own economic and social imprisonment.
Neither party or their party hacks want independent thnkers they want party followers.
Well by supporting those they say we should has led the United States inot one of the most corruptly and soon to be completly dominated Police state on earth.
then again why not both pass laws to limit the popualces ability to think for themselves.
Both partys destroyed the Constituion and not one party member or party blog site even dares mention it.
Not one party of either partys sites or peopel dare mention the next president and party elected will be the most powerfull group of people on earth. with lawmaking abilitys that the popualce cannot decide against.
Boh partys have been killing people around this earth for their corproate and defense contractorscampaign contributions for so long that people on earth would not give a damn one way or another if indeed the united states was nuked by a terrorist.
today we seean economy that has lost over half of its dollars value in just six years compared to other major currencys, is now trying to get the very same corproations who use slave labor to build slave labor plants under a new economic grouping of US, Mexico and Canada and in order to do so they have jumped the cost of food over 300% in just 6 months and the cost of fuel and energy almost 150% in twoears and tosave corrupt lending and finacial Instituions, 85% of the value of the US dollar is backed by realestate not resources or industrial domeic facorys, already over stuffed US held currencys oputside our borders.
Yes vote Democrats and see the United States becoem a friggn banana republic, more like a bullshit republic as that is all the people deserve.
Under current conditions if the draft was reinstated the % of gays would reach an all time high. Even if you had to bring video evidence of your homosexuality.
Hide Behind - so… that means we should just walk to the slaughter house and just give in? Be cow food like the rest of the cows? Pray to cope not pray for change? Tread water not swim for shore? I really do agree with you but how to get out of this I proclaim not to know. Sure, line them up! To not get into this in the future…( hundred years).I can see taking some work.
Shakker - they’ll just send them all to be a seaman with the navy! No joke, as they unzip their fly and ask which part of the armed forces you want to join! A million stories in the naked city….
If there was a draft the largest draft you would see and feel would be from all the sheep running to get in lines, one to be drafted and the other to join. Thjose who join being smarter than the dumber than rocks average draftee, thinking that if they join they will get out of combat and get jobs in elecronics and other sweet jobs.
A draft may be just what country and religous rightys need in order to prove Darwin wrong, mankind is not evolving and each generation becomes more like its primative ancestors.
Blue Dog democrats? In the California Central Valley, US REP Jim Costa fully supports Iraqi occupation and funding. He’s a REP in DEM clothing. What’s even more ironic, he ran unopposed in 2006 as a dem in an area that is heavily GOP. He’s Fresno’s smaller version of Joe Lieberman and should just switch parties. Of course Fresno County also fully supports GOP rubber stampers Radanovich and Dennis “AIPAC” Nunes, but at least their party is formally and accurately indicated.
The Dems have many crypo-Republicans, neocons, hawks, Zionists, DINOS (Democrats in Name Only), corprotists, etc. in their ranks. Since it’s clearly more than 50%, there’s good argument for the Progressive Dems to bolt from that party, join the Greens, and expose the remainder for what they are.
In a nutshell, we have a quandry of whether to continue the (futile?) attempt at turning the Dems into a more progressive party, or whether to cut our losses and run. I see advantages on both sides, but what’s been done to date has failed.
Sometimes I think that it’s the presence of the Progressives in that party which is the root problem. This allows the crypo-Republicans/hawks/zionists/etc. the ability to leverage progressive rhetoric and the liberal blocs they connect to. If the progressives bailed, it would be a brain-drain in that party (much like in the Bush Admin) and the public at-large — not just a smaller progressive community like CD — would see the Dems as inseparable from the Rethugs. It would then become a political landscape of Rethugs vs. Progressives, and the DLC sort would likely go join the Rethugs where they belong anyway.
Progressive and Democrat?
The Democrats have usurped this word, Progressive, in an attempt to hide their past complicity in the mess they have made of this Country.
Their use of airwaves, mainly AM shock jocks of politics, by labeling each of their radio as Progressive but note the lack of Greens or any other real imput ito the debates and the amounts of Demos they push every day.
their worship of Clinton who set back social welfare progrms and made the neediest people either begin working for governemtn or take low non living wages and further alienating them from the system.
Clinotn who was in actuality one of bloddiest presidencys ever from Africa to Balkans to Iraq an almost daily death dealing entity.
the Camp in balkans Bondsteel now 15 years standing when the Democrats promised to bering them home by christmas in the 90″s.
NAFTA, self explanatory- the new economic entityof Canada Mexico and US- self explanatory- more money to teachers who tend to vote democratic and the school systems are failing-self explanatory and with a Goals program that is directly tied to the corporate and politcal aims of a National Socialist Society.
To let any Democrat get befroe us in any meeting or TV media and use the word progressive without protesting and booing them is a falure of our power in a Democracy.
Stopping this government and its use of war is not progressive it is SANITY and playing with the system of politics by the people within it is INSANITY if we do not as a people, a progressive people, demand First that the war end, the military get the hell back behind US barricades, and every man or woman in any party who tries to stop it be put behind bars, the energy and e4ducational resources to further its warmaking abilitys be put inot rebuilding this countrys infrastructure instead of destroyin the lives of people in rest of world.
A progressive people would understand that people in Countrys such as Latin America have a right and duty to use their countrys resources for their people as a whole and that is damn well what should be getting done in the United States of America.
No corporate rights, is progressive, not killing people so that predominately foreign owned oil firms can dominate our needs for energy is progressive.
Paying farmers to grow corn for gasoline and energy needs of the coming slave labor industryies, instead of as a food item, in us is not progressive it is destructive.
To say we need wind turbines in US and then buy every damn component from a foreign firm that at the same times is major investor in US energy for sale to public is not progressive it is national suicide.
Yet these so called progressives in reality Democrats for Profit in blazers instead of Armani suits, continually push these programs.
Why?
Because over 50% of Americans work for the government directly and some 13% depend upon government support occupaitons such as defence jobs.
the same damn effort that goes into telling a young red neck of anti social nut case he needs to kill to protect his country can be used to turn that energy into building this country.
Thsi deliberate destruction fo economy so that people join the National guard thinking they are cutting a fat hog with a dual income can be applied to working on civic infratstructre programs and not supporting the wear machinery.
Now that would be Progressive but it would not be the Democrat way!
Now that would be p[rogressive
Well, there have been some Democrats that one wonders about: Wellstone, Kucinich, Gravel, probably many local state legislature Democrats especially in the midwest and New England states have been enough to attract the young/idealistic/white middle-class activists who proudly work summer jobs for some non-profit that wants your money, volunteer on campaigns, and vote Democrat.
I’ve encountered several democrats, as I’ve grown older, who — it’s clear — are crypto-Republicans. And they know it. It’s an easy algorithm to determine where real identity lies. Look at income level, family fortune, professional modus operandi, and connections to the m.i.c. They can tout democrat or progressive rhetoric all they want, but they’re fooling less people each year. I wonder if they’re fooling themselves.
I’ve come up with a corollary to the cliche: “Actions speak more loudly than words.” Namely, “Inactions also speak more loudly than words.”
There’s plenty of inaction among the Democrats. It’s a good crook crook/bad crook arrangement. The Rethugs do the nasty stuff and we’re supposed to hate them for it. The Dems are charged with the soothing pill, telling us why we (always) can’t do anything just yet, nodding in mock compassion that they understand our plight, are working for change, etc. but there’s always some reason that nothing changes. Public soothsayers.
Still, I think it’s worthwhile to continue the battle on both fronts: trying to turn the Dems into a progressive party from the inside (flocking to the precinct caucuses), but when that fails then it’s time for a switcheroo after the primaries: vote Green or some other third party.
Frosty bunny if you think corporate and AIPAC supported Hilary Clinton is going to leave you any crumbs you are in serious denial. Rather it will be more war, more corporate outsourcing, and you getting stuck holding the bag again. The ONLY things the two corporate sock puppet parties disagree on are manufactured “culture war,” issue like burning the flag, abortion, gun control, and religion permeating the state. The powers that be have no position whatsoever on these issue as long as they are making bank. And they will make bank regardless of which party gets in, in 2008. Hint, it was Bill Clinton who gave us NAFTA/WTO/NAFTA, salvage logging (do a google search), bombing of Serbia, Iraq and the Sudan (an asprin factory) and more non violent “offenders” (users of some drugs) in prison.
Shenonymous anti-war activists quite literally organized several million people to march before the Iraq war even started in 2003, the first time in history that has ever happened BTW with major protests before a war even started. With Vietnam at the same point in 1965 there were not even tens of thousands protesting. of course our corporate MSM gives this zero coverage, and the corporate music companies don’t sign all the very militant protest song writers in the hip-hop, new metal, indie rock, avant guard, folk, jazz, etc, genres. In short protest surrounds you in your community if you look for it by going to your local peace and justice center or looking on the internet, but you aren’t going to hear about it on the corporate MSM fogitaboutit…
Brian Baird has a Progressive Punch rating of 84%, 75% on matters of War & Peace. Melissa Bean rates 75% overall, and 83% on War & Peace issues. Yes, I wish they were higher, but the highest any House Republican rates is Christopher Shays with 31% and he scores 14% on War and Peace. Is this really what we want?
No one is expecting instant results, so to justify Democratic performance on the basis that they’re doing the best they can with what they have is to steer the argument in the wrong direction. Even without the “numbers,” the Democrats should NOT vote for war funding, more surveillance, or the rest of the illegal and anti-democratic Bush agenda–yet time and again, the “yea” camp is full of Democrats. They also should NOT have taken impeachment off the table. Even if they couldn’t stomach going after the president, there is still Cheney and Gonzalez–both with enough criminal activity to justify an impeachment process. These actions would at least have sent a signal to their base that the party was serious about accountability and reversing the disasters of this administration. But instead, the party has given the appearance that their every move is calculated to win in 2008, rather than to protect the Constitution or our civil liberties. Worse, many are now suspecting that the Dems want to profit from the Imperial Presidency that Bush has now established. Once this much power is grabbed, it will be very difficult for the next president to give it back. This in itself is criminal–and the Dems will pay for their legal and moral corruption in 2008.
I’m afraid you are right mrraven and I say afraid because MSM is pablum news that coddles up to the corporate tyrants. There is no one like Edward Morrow. PBS Mark Shields is the only one I’ve heard that sticks it to them. Everyone else seems to either be hystericals or mouthpieces. Sort of akin to the renegades and apathetics of Zardoz. The Internet has an awful lot of screamers who bark in rather frienzied blips.
I want intelligent reasoned discussion so that we can cut through crap and find ways to be effective. The activists you note were not effective. I did not hear about the march you describe and I go to PBS strictly for radio and most TV news. Daniel Shore is a curare-dipped arrow tip who I appreciate immensely, but he is 91 years old! Who will inherit his tongue? I cruise the news outlets on the ‘net that includes NPR, PBS, BBC, and some papers like McClatchy, Slate, KPFK Los Angeles (Pacifica) and I get involved in some more than interesting CommonDreams discussions (bailed from Truthdig who eradicates people from posting in a fascistic manner, but that is beside the point).
There are indie recording companies and there are still coffee houses, which is where the musicians of Vietnam protests played. And there are campuses which is where a lot of intensely aggravated Protests start the grass roots to grow, then spreads like crabgrass! But it needs individuals with charisma to get attention. A Sean Penn, Leo di Caprio, Martin Sheen, Susan Sarandon, and a 21st century Jane Fonda-like spokesperson to attract their celeb friends to get involved. I thought Al Franken would ratchet up the public discussion but all he wants are dollar donations for his candidacy. This business of the Democratic Congress to take impeachment off the table is absurd. With the demise of Karl Rove and now Alberto Gonzales, something must be working but we are right to be suspicious. These are very bad dudes. And if Bush says Gonzales was dragged through the mud, well, pigs deserve to be dragged through the mud.
Ouida said John Edwards would make a good Democrat President, and the more I think about Edwards, the more I am tending to agree with Ouida. Edwards is now very well known. While it’s true he had investments in subprime mortgage companies, often one doesn’t know where an investment broker puts your money. You trust them to do a good job. He has been quick to recognize the problem and is doing whatever it takes to divest. So he is looking good to me because while I like Kucinich, I feel he cannot win and I definitely don’t want to lose to a Republican. I think Clinton or Obama could win, but I am not happy with their programs. Edwards is the one I can support. I have to listen more to all of them. Sorry all, this got too long. I’ll try harder to be brief henceforth.