It’s too early to call Obama a party leader. Give him some time.

Answering Valley Girl’s inquiry:

I don’t know my dear lady. I have a background in social work/psychology where judgmentalism was schooled out of me, you have to be practically amoral to do therapy, where lots of abstruse phenemonological and psychoanalytic explanations take the place of moral judgment, but I struggle with what’s in Bush’s heart, he has re-stirred the whole hornets nest concerning the question of human evil, and I’m thinking, I’m thinking, using the cranksophere with gratitude for insight & clarity.

Maybe Obama does get it. Bill Clinton says exactly the same thing, that Republicans aren’t evil.

So much praise has been shoveled on Obama in the past that at this time he is starting to believe his own press releases. It is a malady suffered by hollywood stars self-righteous politicians.

“Powerful actors, like the top-down media, will not attack the President unless they think he’s weak. But to make the case that he is weak, he must be treated with contempt, and that cannot happen when party leaders like Barack Obama simply refuse to act creatively and risk driving up their disapproval ratings.”

I think this is a fundamental disagreement between activists on both sides and some of the rest of us who reside in the middle. Activists focus on demonizing the leading figures of the opposing side. They argue that such characterizations are accurate (which they sometimes are), and need to be pressed.

I think that misses something fairly big.

Suppose, for a moment, we were to roll back history a few decades, and that we were all living in mid-1960’s America under LBJ. I might conclude, if I were a close observer, that LBJ was one of the most intense political fixers ever to occupy the White House — that he rolled over any procedures that got in his way and manipulated the system in a way that threatened our basic checks and balances.

If I were his opponent, I might nevertheless concede the question of his personal goodwill. I might choose not to attack on character grounds. Why? Because I can argue the merits of the policy. Because when I do so I look like a leader — someone interested in taking the country in a particular direction — and he still probably looks like a gutter fighter, whether I call him one or not.

The public perception of my opponent will not, in any event, depend on how I characterize him. People know I have a personal interest in demonizing him. People see it as the same old partisan warfare they long-ago tired of. People in the middle, that is.

Here’s another simple observation for you.

The most risky element of the left political strategy right now is the growing interest in impeachment — risky for the left, that is. Bush has never had much success on policy grounds. It’s likely that, barring impeachment, he will muddle through his last years with either mediocre or bad poll numbers.

That’s a recipie for Democratic electoral victory in 2006 and/or 2008.

If you go for impeachment at any level of seriousness, you replace probably victory with a crapshoot. You tie your agenda to the notion that Bush isn’t just bad, but bad enough to be removed. There is (and should be) a very high standard for removal in the minds of most Americans. If the case isn’t clear enough to draw bipartisan support, you’ll be viewed as overreaching, and you’ll be viewed as replacing a debate over substance with the typical partisan game of investigating and prosecuting the other side.

I don’t believe you’re going to win, if you go for impeachment. And I think you’ll make Bush more popular, in that losing effort, than if you engaged him on his policies.

Bush is a subnormal fascist.
Obama wants to be Ghandi.
Ghandi would have called Bush a subnormal fascist.
Obama should call Bush a subnormal fascist.

Jane says this is a speech “Obama made recently.” What’s the definition of recently? Matt Stoller’s post at MyDD gives no date and provides no link, but describes it as part of Obama’s “stump speech.” That implies to me that it was something said during the 2004 campaign, not in reference to any recent issue. I could be wrong, but I could find no quotes of it on Google News, so I’d like to pin down the time. I’d also like to see more of the speech in context.

I have a hunch I’m more favorably disposed to Obama’s tone than a lot of folks, but I think that’s a side issue to having the details right.

How does anyone figure Obama is a Party leader after less than a year in the Senate? He’s on the bottom rung of the ladder there and he’s got a long way to go. Still, he knows what he’s saying when he says it. It’s hard to believe he’d be praising Bush if he didn’t mean to.

I can see Obama trying to spread oil on troubled waters, so to speak.

But it’s enabling, and it sucks.
I’m sorry I can’t be more charitable.
At this point in our country’s history, I feel as if we’re struggling for our liberty all over again.
“Adolf is, I’m sure, a good Christian…”
Ptui.

When has Obama ever taken a real shot? He’s just grooving into opportunist careerism and anyone who thinks he’s going to upset the applecart better think again.

I understand the need to present oneself as a fair-minded pol, not a “Bush-hater”. I just question the wisdom of presenting Repub policies as innocently misguided, rather than placing them in context and identifying them as part of an overall strategy, namely to fuck over anyone who isn’t rich.

This is only Obama’s first year in office, right? I hope he’s laying the groundwork for a more aggressive approach. I hope it’s that he’s still learning the ropes, planning for the long run, etc.

Otherwise, it’s almost impossible to believe that an educated Black man (I’m Black, not all that educated, but practiced in looking over my shoulder) wouldn’t be able to see the depth of the vileness of this Administration and not be able to call it out for what it was.

I can only think that he’s biding his time, waiting for the right time to take a real shot.

flawedplan
Bush is a modern day Caligula. Let Obama go somewhere and wallow in his own compassion.

flawedplan 12.22.05 – 7:20 pm

I am not sure from what you’ve said above where you stand presently in your opinion of Bush. Can you please clarify? Thanks.

correction: No one has to name the name.

No one has the name the name.
He doesn’t need to speak about evil if he doesn’t want to. Just state the sorry facts (almost too numerous to mention) and come up with some solutions. We are in very deep shit. Let’s cut to the freakin’ chase.

You’re out of your tree if you think people are ready to hear this gracious man describe the Prez as evil. “Good”& “loves his country” are words of conciliatory hope & kindness, “evil” smacks of closed-minded hubris.

Assuming, as I do, that the senator spoke from sincerity rather than strategically his words sound to me like they’re coming from a place of inner struggle. They are gratuitous, he is confirming an assertion that goes without saying, we’re all good people and we all have good intentions…unless…jebus…this is wrenching …I went through that, including the extreme absolute conclusion that the president is a Good man, just to end the dissonance, momentary peace of mind, and a sense of hope, as in saying so will make it come true… The whole country has been wrestling with Bush’s character, people of compassion, fairness, and who have no idea how they’d survive Bush’s evil, needing him to be good; if you believe Obama could be experiencing gravitas like this, give him time, trust the process, yo, let him find his own words and way.

Valley Girl, that’s what I’m thinking.

I don’t need to hear anybody, especially not Barack Obama, say that he thinks Bush loves his country. That’s just hot air and a fucking stupid thing to say.

This isn’t a picnic. If you’re not on the edge then you’re taking up too much room.

http://obama.senate.gov/contact/

I have just sent an email to Obama. To send an email one has to choose a topic. I chose “other issues”, and under that, ethics.

text of email–

“I don’t think that George Bush is a bad man. I think he loves his country.”

Above is a quote from one of your recent speeches.

I cannot disagree more strongly with your words and your sentiments. George Bush is the most unprincipled and reckless president I have seen in my lifetime. In short, he is a bad man, a bad man whose contemtuous disregard for truth and the laws of our country have taken us on an irresponsible course that shows no respect for what is truly the best in our country– a commitment to justice and fairness in the US and around the world. He has spoken of the Constitution as “just a piece of paper” and continually disregards this essential basis of our nation, a document that our founding fathers crafted with prescient eloquence and from their own costly experience of tyranny. Mr. Bush does not have the best interests of our nation at heart. Whether this comes from a lack of education about history and the world at large, or from a callous desire to maintain his personal authority at all costs, or from misplaced loyalty to the military-industrial complex that has benefited him and his cronies greatly, or from some other sinister cause, I cannot say. Whatever this underlying cause may be, I see no evidence that his actions, throughout the course of his presidency, in any way are, or can be construed as those of a man who loves his country.
-

mr bush nice man
obama right to be good to president
mr obama nice man too

Is Bush a war criminal? In my mind, unquestionably. But to shout that in people’s faces won’t work.

Yeah, let’s call Bush a war criminal WHO’S A NICE GUY and say it in people’s faces PLEASANTLY so they’ll take us seriously and not, like, think we’re UNBALANCED or anything.
.

his approach is wrong because it is based on lies….why should he lie to look nice?

I just don’t get this. The 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination is right there for the taking. Any Democrat who wants it earns massive respect from us anytime they publicly (and rightfully) rip Bush for any of his many crimes against this country. Look at all the good Feingold has done for himself by just vocally standing up for what’s right. Just what do we have to do to get our people to listen to us, the ones who are supposed to matter, instead of the clueless centrist-loving media ?

How do you know that attacking Bush doesn’t work?

Who’s ever tried it before?

As a constituent who’s been somewhat disappointed in Obama’s too quiet first year in office, I am nonetheless amazed by how condescending this post is. Obama “obviously” doesn’t understand? Please. Could he have achieved what he has without understanding the social, economic, political and racial narratives that inform our lives? Hardly.

Just because someone chooses a different approach than you would take doesn’t mean he fails to grasp what the Republicans are doing. Have you read his speeches this year that contain his attacks on Republican social Darwinism? Obama recognizes that to make a difference, to make Kansas sit up and notice, he has to attack policies, not personalities.

Is Bush a war criminal? In my mind, unquestionably. But to shout that in people’s faces won’t work. When was the last time a Democratic leader, including Howard Dean, pointed out that the US’s infant mortality rate has gone up under Bush? Ever?

Attack the policies, the hypocrisy underlying those policies, and, yes, even the criminality. But that can be done without demonizing individuals — as much as BushCo deserve it — because the personal attacks will turn as many people away as it will attract. Isn’t that what happened in the 2004 election?

What’s wrong with being a Bush hater? What makes you think that they will get trivialized by speaking like that?

No politician has ever spoken that way so you don’t know that it wouldn’t be received well. It goes over well here, and I bet it would go over well nationwide.

OK- let’s see if it works..
rwcole | 12.22.05 – 2:40 pm

once again, AMEN!

It was worth putting up with Skeletor on Hardball to see the Maureen Dowd thing. some very moments. check it out when they replay it

Karen Allen:

Can you cite one instance where Obama toadies up to the Republicans? Don’t mistake his politeness for that of sucking up.

From Sirotablog, May 25, 2005 (in a more-in-sorrow-than-anger post):

Despite his anti-war positions as a candidate in 2004, Obama’s second vote as a U.S. Senator was in support of confirming Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State. He also voted to confirm John Negroponte as Director of National Intelligence, despite Negroponte’s involvement in Iran-Contra and other situations that clearly raise questions about his ethics and discretion. Obama also voted for a bill to limit citizens rights to seek legal redress against abusive corporations. During the bankruptcy debate, he helped vote down a Democratic amendment to cap the abusive interest rates credit card companies could charge. And now, Obama cast a key procedural vote in support of President Bush’s right-wing judges.

That was last spring, mind you.

If Obama was triagulating so furiously fresh out of the box, how much more Clintonian and Bidenesque can we expect him to become after a few more years working the Comity Club?

Forgive me for saying this, Karen, but given all the vitriol you spew on this site at a Nation journalist who’s made dumb recent choices but has nothing to prove to anyone about his progressive credentials, I’m surprised at all the slack you’re cutting a Senator who’s voted to help rethuglican war criminals fail upward.

new thread

maybe so, h2, but i still return to the notion that ‘bush is nice guy’ is an intentional, very conscious propaganda play by the BCF. You hear that like a drumbeat from the MSM, Tweety, Fox, etc… Obama plays directly into that

Peanut,

Right On!!! Dud Dems…askin’ the executioner ta dance as he puts the nose over the poor fucker’s head.

Granite State Destroyer, yes, so far you could say that Joe Lieberman is a Jewish Obama…it’s time fer Obama to prove otherwise.

Norske, I am sorry for my comment, honestly. I was just very frustraded with some of the comments in this thread. I think it is perfectly fine for you to voice you opinion the way you choose, but to expect Obama to do the same is, I think, unrealistic and would be prove to be unproductive.

bwahahaha

“Cheney has raging hormones everyday!’ per Maureen

Brilliant!

dark, loony, paranoid = Dick Cheney per Maureen

what?! she didn’t call him ‘nice?’ go figure…

Puzzled,

I think the argument against the policy is strengthened by the polite nod to our Dale Carnegie president. 8-)

The polite chit-chat about Mr. Bush sends the message that Obama is not a Bush-hater, which, IMO, works to preempt dismissal of his criticism as the mere rantings of a Bush-hater.

So I’m standing up as someone who thinks his speech would be less effective if he omitted those two sentences, as far as it concerns the segment of the audience that does not believe Bush to bo the epitome of pure evil. (I tend to think it’s a mix of evil, indifference and ignorance.)

hahah ‘You know the Bushes”…nice one, Maureen

Skeletor and Maureen Dowd….that’s an interesting combo

rwc, you’re right..
the problem is that the Dems don’t have a bomb-thrower—at least not one they support.

(Made a comment upthread that got anonymized)
.
Dud Collegial Dems — they’ll run out and fall over themselves saying Bush is a nice guy, or GOP means well

… but immediately distance themselves from Dems and groups who DO criticize the admin effectively.

When Dud Dems put as much time / energy representing who voted them in as in proving they get along with the GOP juggernaut — who’s basically a NICE juggernaut at heart — I’ll change my reg back from I to D.

Every senator needs to build their credibility in a way that they are comfortable with and that works for them..

Obama is apparently trying to build an image as one who is open minded and not a Bush hater– which would give him more credibility on those occaissions when he wants to blast the mother fucker..

OK- let’s see if it works..

by all means, let’s not focus any outrage on the inept leaaders of the Democratic party…maybe a few bits of constructive chitchat at the next Demo tea party…that’s the ticket!

Chupie,

OK.

How about this one: Joe Lieberman is a Jewish Barack Obama?

Is that more stupid or what?

-GSD

Chupacabra,

If ya wanna see stupid, read yer last post. And as for pullin’ punches with the fascists…not on yer life!!! We have experienced a fascist coup, the consolidation of power is takin place before our very eyes and you folks wanna preserve some fantasy of respectable political discourse…now I know what the non-fascists felt like in Germany in 1930-31 as they watched the Nazis hijack their history.

Call ‘em what they are , folks, they are FASCISTS. And make our elected leaders face up to ‘em or get the hell outta the way…and that includes the black Joe Lieberman.

was that judge she was talking too Richard Posner? what a numbskull he was, seeing absolutely nothing at all wrong with the gov grabbing all his conversations, emails etc and then sort thru them for proof of bad stuff.

why does it occur to so very few of these rightwingers that the same powers can be used to sort thru their political and other views.

whenever i’m talking to someone justifying all this nonsense, i just ask them how they’ll feel if someone they don’t like becomes Pres…like, say, Hillary Clinton…that slows em down…it’s pretty fun watching the expression on their faces

The Republicans don’t need to criticize the Dems–we do it quite nicely ourselves, thank you.

Some constructive criticism and brainstorming ways to improve the party are helpful, but we need to focus our anger and vitriol on the ones who are creating the “culture of corruption.”

I also believe Obama has fallen prey to the curse of the unrealistically high expectations. I hope that this will only make him a better senator.

Bill Richardson on the Andrea Mitchell Softball show just made the connection between the NSA domestic spying case and John Bolton’s interesting request for NSA intercepts – Richardson described it as “worrisome.”

Hopefully, now that the connection is out in the open it’ll get some attention…

karen,

It’s so much what he says, but it’s the ten out of fourteen DLC Senators that he is raising money for through his Hopefund

Earlier this year, Senator Barack Obama created Hopefund, a political committee, with the goal of promoting the candidacies of leaders who are committed to changing the course of our nation to ensure the promise of America for future generations.

I’m sorry but many of those Senators are the problem, not the solution. Money speaks louder than words.

scary, that’s what I was wondering, but he seemed to be a judge now, the only one they could find to speak on this, I’m sure. Andrea Mitchell is actually doing a good job today.

“Why give Rove such god-like powers? Lately, he’s had feet of clay.” Marysz, I don’t think Tobias was assigning godlike powers to Rove. He was just using the cliche, WWJD, and applying it to Rove in order to tell people not to give up out of frustration and scandal fatigue. Rove et al have feet of clay both lately and previously. And that fact is becoming impossible to hide. I agree with Percy that the tide is turning. There are only so many battles this group can fight at the same time. They’re dividing and being conquered.

it also reinforces the Demo’s image as weak, vacillating, pussyfooting around types. most ‘folks’ don’t respect that for some reason

I can completely understand the frustration with the comment. I certainly dont think Bush is “nice” or anything remotely close, but to risk being marginalized by a media so willing to parrot RNC talking points is really not smart.

99895

An inflammatory attack on the man — no matter how accurate it is or how satisfying it’s delivery — just gets in the way of persuading the persuadable that change is needed

—-

nobody’s suggesting Obama should engage in inflamatory attacks. as Jane suggested above, just leave out pro Bush endorsement. this “bush is a nice guy” line is no minor thing. you hear it everytime this worst Pres we’ve ever had screws the pooch in some way. it always ‘yeah, everyone of his policies damage us in some way, but golly gosh, he’s a nice guy.”

and there is Obama the Magnificient adding to the notion…great

Comity has no place in the Dem game plan. I am very against calling the Repugs Nazis or comparing them to Nazis b/c I think it is harmful to the Dems and helpful to the Repugs, but that doesn’t mean that I think the Dems should treat the Repugs with kid gloves. It is only one remark in a speech, and perhaps it is being given too much meaning. That being said, Bush is not a nice guy or a good person – nice good people don’t break the law, don’t step on the constitution, don’t abet their “friends” in their friends’ crimes, etc.

The real point is that the Repugs don’t play by the rules of political comity, and therefore the Dem’s shouldn’t b/c there is no way the Dem’s can win playing by the rules. The Dem’s need to realize that is soooo passe/old-school. Obama and anyone else who tries to make nice is playing a fools game.

Obama needs to take on Chimpy and the whole Repug establishment – doesn’t mean he needs to call them Nazis or whores or whatever, but all Dems, including Obama, need to start defining what is “bad” about the opposition, and calling Chimpy a good guy just really gets in the way of that.

The Tobias email is scary and makes me worry about the Dems ability to do anything. Rover is a good marketer but he is not a genuis, and he didn’t invent the marketing ideas that he and others used (are still using) to bring (and keep) the Repugs to power. What separates Rover from other marketers is that he both understands marketing AND is not bound by any rules – stealing, cheating and lying are all there for him – which are not available to most other marketers (no matter what you think of the corporate world, that is true). So is that what Tobias is stating when he asks “What would Rover do?” There are any number of great marketers in the world from whom Tobias and the Dems can figure out how to create a marketing message and marketing plan for themselves.

I don’t think the Dems need to become the Repugs to beat them, but they need to realize that the old rules do not apply, and they need to attack with a consistent message that the Repugs, from Chimpy on down, ARE bad people doing bad things.

I missed the start of Andrea Mitchell’s discussion with the justice from the 7th circuit. Is he a retired justice? Otherwise, what was he doing giving his legal opinions on this show?

That black Joe Leiberman comment is maybe one of the stupidest things I have ever heard or seen.

Should Bush be Impeached MSNBC Survey
99522
jumped from 99320 in about 1 minute, thats about 200 votes in 60 seconds.

85% Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.
5% No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

9% No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.

2% I don’t know.

Alright, this is my first comment after lurking and soking up all the great information on here since just before Fitzmas I. Hopefully my next one will be more positive…but, WTF? Obama? This is who Im supposed to be angry with today? Karen Allen, I am behind you 100%. This is so counterproductive. To bash someone saying Bush is “a nice person.” Like it or not people there is a way things are done in politics and Obabma is a freshman Senator who, clearly, does not want to be marginalized the way the Kennedy’s and Boxers of the world have been. Had this war been going on when Fiengold worked with McCain on CFR you all probably would have been calling for his head too. Get some perspective.

Obama characterized Bush in a naive way. He made a mistake. That doesn’t make him bad.
karen allen

—–

no, it just makes him another dud Demo leader,which is just what we need to confront the Emperor of which you speak

OK Fols,

I’m gunna commit heresy but here it is…unless he shows me sumpthin’ quickly, Obama is our black Joe Lieberman.

There, I said it and I feel much better…so far Obama has gotten a free pass on the Boardwalk from folks who have been starvin’ fer a black, electable Democrat from Illinois. Unless he steps up SOON to provide cover and legitimacy for the progressive base of the Democratic Party we might as well give our Move On dues ta the DLC.

so what’s the basis for the Fitzmas rumors? Anything?

Well, Obama is one of my senators, and I have no problem with his approach, which focuses his criticism on policy, not ad hominem attacks.

If I were Obama, the challenge I’d see is not in giving warm fuzzy feelings to those of us who despise the Bush presidency.

I’d focus on getting people who aren’t ready to storm the barricades to think clearly about the impact of this administration’s actions.

An inflammatory attack on the man — no matter how accurate it is or how satisfying it’s delivery — just gets in the way of persuading the persuadable that change is needed.

There are certain people who will never see that our leader is eviscerating the Constitution, that his policies are creating damage that may take decades to unwind.

There are others, though, who have to work through the cognitive dissonance caused by the gap between the messages that have been repeated incessantly, and the truth that is coming to the fore.

Name-calling isn’t going to help change their minds.

But we need to change those minds if we’re to make an impact in the mid-term elections.

Just my $.02 from Illinois.

The comment made by Barack Obama exemplifies the weakness in the Deomcratic party. No one [told him comment would be] extracted and used by the Repubs.

Have to disagree. Tropic Dems will take every opportunity to grab a self-flattering few moments of spotlight to endear themselves to media and the right as “moderate” OR to present themselves to fellow Senators as a comity-first kind of collegial.

Pushing liberals, feminists, black/minority voters, gays to the back of the tent to make room for the apparent stampede of disgruntled Bushies is SOP for DINOs or DINOs in the making. I busted my hump for the Dems and I (and my uterus) are nearly out of the tent as it is.

All it takes is for one celebrating dumbfuck cross burner in the center for the whole damn thing to go up, in which case I’ll be glad to have been pushed outside entirely.

We have a preznit who has crowned himself Emperor, has dragged the country into a war based of false information, who is proud that he spies on Americans, and the list goes on and on.

And here we are, tearing apart a Democratic freshman senator who is still learning the ropes. Why would anyone want to go into politics when his own potential base rips into him?

Obama characterized Bush in a naive way. He made a mistake. That doesn’t make him bad.

Tweety is somewhere getting ‘reeducated’

She’s radiant, almost girlish.
SaltinWound

——

yup, it’s terrifying, isnt’ it?

Andrea Mitchell looks absolutely delighted to be in the anchor seat on Hardball. She’s radiant, almost girlish.

A few minutes ago I saw Lanny Davis speaking with Toensig on Wolf’s show.
At one point, he said “I disrespectfully disagree with you” to Toensig.
Didn’t seem to matter..she was all smiles and lies.

ok…name me three times since being in the Senate where Obama has risked political career over something he holds deeply..

heck, name me one…

Like many of us, I have been waiting for a clear response from the Democratic Party. IÂ’m still waiting. What would such a message entail?
1. Standing up would be a good place to start
2. Remain standing (one offs make good sound bites that convince no one)
3. Clarity (Not just on Iraq but on any issue. On Iraq, instead of “we will stand down as the Iraqis stand up” how about “We our sons and daughters have done their part. It is now time for the Iraqis to do theirs. We will leave in an orderly fashion in consultation with the new Iraqi government but it is up to them and the Iraqi people to decide whether they have a country worth preserving and a future worth fighting for)
4. Challenge the discourse (DonÂ’t try to out Rove Rove. DonÂ’t try to justify, qualify, and obfuscate a la Kerry and the DNC. Call a lie a lie. Call an assault on the Constitution an assault on the Constitution. Call a failed policy a failed policy. Say straight out that you have to choose between the President and the Constitution, your allegiance and duty is to the Constitution. Remind Americans that we are a people whose strength does not derive from a politics of fear but of a native optimism, that we believe we can build a better world for ourselves and our children and that this is how we should be spending the energies of this country.)
5. Action (Go to the American people, tell them you need their help, donÂ’t ask, tell them we need to get back to building the country, donÂ’t talk about ignoring special interests, talk about common interests, and then go and do something, be an opposition party, have an alternative, put forward your ideas, fight to enact responsible and sensible laws, if they get shot down, make sure the country knows who benefited and who (the country) lost, and donÂ’t stop because if we wish to make this a better country it has to begin here and now.
I invite your thoughts.

Obama Canonization…great phrase.

i remember all the pre and post speech ballyhooing he got in the MSM for his platitude laden, woodenly presented Demo Convention speech.

between Hillary Clinton and Obama the Dems have enough ‘heavy hitting’ pols to destroy their chances for the next decade or more

Audrey Y – that poll surprised and delighted me!

Kevin–Can you cite one instance where Obama toadies up to the Republicans? Don’t mistake his politeness for that of sucking up.

For those who (as I do) think Obama’s a decent Senator, I don’t think Jane’s point is to disagree. This is one of those situations where it’s sufficient to describe the awful things the Administration is doing without adding, “but I think they’re good people doing what they think is right.” Just leave it off and describe the conduct, clearly.

The “image” we create is important here, because the WH is going to be making the argument that, whatever the debate is over legal authority and inherent war powers, etc, we should just trust them to do the right thing.

If they think of Bush as a nice guy trying to do the right thing, then the American people will be more inclined to overlook the legal arguments about unchecked executive power. But if they don’t trust him, don’t think he’ll use his power for good (or has a mean streak or is easily led by vindictive aides), then the extreme legal arguments the WH is making will scare the piss out of Americans. Image matters here, and the nice guy Obamas need to understand that.

Whenever I contemplate the sorry state of the Democratic Party, I am always haunted by these words, written by Antony Beevor in The Spanish Civil War, that describe the political situation in late 19th century Spain.

Meanwhile, although there may have often been a vicious rivalry between liberals and conservatives in the provinces, there was virtually a gentleman’s agreement between their leaders in the capital. Whenever there was an unpopular measure to carry out, the conservatives retired and the liberals, who had now become almost indistinguishable from their opponents came in. The two main parties resembled those little wooden men who appear alternately out of their houses to indicate the weather. But any high-minded figure, however aristocratic, who denounced the corruption was regarded as a traitor and shunned. (p19)

With a few notable exceptions, this describes the situation in the US for the past thirty plus years. When we needed to balance the budget on the backs of the poor, Clinton was sent in. When it was time to blow the resulting surplus like a drunken sailor in port, George W got the call.

I think Obama knows exactly what he is doing. He does not want to be on the fringe like a Barbara Boxer. He wants to mix it up with the Kool Kids Klub on those Sunday morning public opinion manufacturing sessions. The price of entrance, proving his is part of the machine and not resisting it, he seems more than willing to pay.

Obama is a personally shy man. At a party, he isn’t the “life of the party”. He has a lot to learn about national politics and he knows its. Chicago voters, a well-known tough group, and Illinois voters overwhelmingly put Obama in the Senate. The challenger for the IL seat was Alan Keyes, who lives in Maryland.

Dee–

Very good! I heard he was voted “presidential candidate you’d most want to have over to a barbeque”. It hadn’t occured to me that it was the BIG barbeque, those plled felt he should be “invited” to.

Chiburb,
I know Francine Simmons and she was impressed with Obama, but she is also a hardcore DFA member who hates Bush with a passion. Not sure you can generalize Obama’s appeal to the average voter based on her impressions.

This is another example of why I got so angry at Carper’s comments last week. He had said “Dean needs to go to Iraq” and Drudge headlined the quote to make it seem like Carper was criticizing Dean. Actually Carper was in agreement with Dean’s statement that we couldn’t win in Iraq, but the article and Drudge twisted his words so that it didn’t seem that way.

Obama is wrong on the merits, as well. If he truly believes Bush is not a bad person, and Bush has good intentions, then he’s not as shrewd as I thought.

“But in trying to do my job for the Party, and especially as a way to deal
with the frustration, I don’t ask myself what Jesus would do, I ask myself what
Karl Rove would want me to do.”

Why give Rove such god-like powers? Lately, he’s had feet of clay.

Obama was on the daily show a few weeks ago, and he told Jon S pretty much the same things. Specifically, that these wrong-doers are not bad people, and that they are doing what they think is best. (go to DailyShow.com, and view links to guests to watch)

This type of argument sounds good at the time, because the Bush supporters don’t see themselves as evil. But this will allow Bush to play the argument “they saw the same intelligence as I did.” Except the words will be “the congress failed in its duty to advise and concede (sic). So it wasn’t my fault. I was doing the best I could with bad information. Even Obama said I wasn’t a bad person.”

Dems have to avoid message mushiness. It does no good to get bogged down in qualifiers and ‘nuanced’ positions like “Bush is a good man BUT –” when making statements.

Nuance in policy is one thing — but in message, it just keeps biting Dems in the ass again and again, and it applies with statements like Obama’s.

This disgusting man has to be wholly identified with his disgustiing policies, there can’t be any daylight between the two.

see no evil
hear no evil
speak no evil

have some wonder bread

I think Bush is a nice guy too and would like to have a drink with him

from the Lake of Sulphur in hell

i’ve brought bottled water for me

I hope this is ok to post to a blog, but this message was forwarded to me by someone connected to Andy Tobias, Treasurer of the DNC, who is writing to the “team.” I send it along in the spirit of hope:

“Before I say a word or two about Jesus and Karl Rove (really — just a word
or two), let me give you a very brief progress report:

> We are making progress on two important fronts, infrastructure and message:

> INFRASTRUCTURE: We have hired and trained more than half the 200 or so
local organizers who will help to reinvigorate the state parties. I have met
many of these passionate, talented people — whose modest salaries you and I are
paying. They are committed to seeing that every precinct in the country has a
Democratic precinct captain, trained and motivated to take a specific set of
steps leading to a goal of 50 additional votes in every election. Just TEN
more would have won us Ohio, Iowa and New Mexico in 2004.

> MESSAGE: We are beginning to talk more with one voice. It’s not a
coincidence the phrase “culture of corruption” has echoed thru the media . . . and
you will begin to hear more and more coordinated positive messages as well.
(Remember, it wasn’t until SIX WEEKS before the 1994 election that Newt Gingrich
unveiled his Contract On America.)

That said, there are enormous frustrations. Why aren’t we doing this better?
Why aren’t we saying THAT better? I hear it all day long as I chase you
for money, and I agree with much (not all) of what I hear.

But that brings me to Jesus and Karl Rove.

As you know, millions of people go through life finding guidance by asking
themselves: “What would Jesus do?” And I am really, really glad they do.
(Hint: He would not cut taxes for the rich while cutting aid to the poor. He
would not rush to war without a plan to win the peace [or perhaps even with one].
And don’t get me started on torture.)

But in trying to do my job for the Party, and especially as a way to deal
with the frustration, I don’t ask myself what Jesus would do, I ask myself what
Karl Rove would want me to do.

Seriously.

Because I believe the stakes are unbelievably high — this is NOT a
rehearsal; the course of our country’s history, and even (though it sounds wildly
overblown to say it), perhaps even our species’ history — hangs in the balance.

And so, to try to cut through the complexity and the frustration, I ask
myself: “What would Karl Rove want me to do.” And then, of course, I do the
opposite.

So as you consider whether to drop out of politics for a while, because it’s
so frustrating and imperfect — which it is — ask yourself: would that
gladden or sadden Karl Rove?

As you consider whether to help fund Governor Dean’s EVERY PRECINCT PROJECT
or perhaps, take 2005 off instead (lord knows we all deserve a breather) ask
yourself: what does Karl Rove hope you do?

(Last I looked, the RNC had $35 million in the bank, we had $5 million, and
paying 200 local organizers, on top of everything else the DNC has to do, burns
through $5 million very fast.)

I find that personalizing it this way, even though I’ve never actually met
Karl Rove, and even though this may not be the most sophisticated line of
political thought, helps make a complicated and sometimes dispiriting world simpler
– and invariable strengthens my resolve.

You may not feel the same way about Karl Rove.

Feel free to substitute Tom DeLay or Rick Santorum or Ann Couter or Rush
Limbaugh. Heck, even Barbara Bush might do it for some of you.

I don’t wish any of them ill. I just don’t want them running our country.

So let me end the year by extending enormous thanks to the many of you who
have done what you can to help this year . . . the frustrations are very real
but so, thanks to you, is the progress . . .

. . . and by inviting those of you who could help but haven’t (very possibly
because, let’s face it, I have become the very most annoying person on the
planet) to take this opportunity to be a hero, boost our morale, fund the EVERY
PRECINCT PROJECT, and get on the scoreboard for 2005.

I hope you’ll click reply; Karl Rove hopes you won’t.

With every good wish for the season . . .”

purvis ames-

I’m not saying that the dems shouldn’t come out swinging. I’m just saying it’s not in their nature to criticize loudly. The dems just have to do it anyway.

Cathy
Why say anything at all? It just plays into the hands of the Repugs.

Marky–I concur that Reid is doing good things.

Love the Cat Behavior comment. Several case studies have shown that murderers often follow a progressive path–pulling legs off insects, torturing animals, and finally the murder of one or more human beings.

No wonder Frist wouldn’t back McCain’s anti-torture amendment. Frist himself admittedly practiced torture.

I think that the democratic problem lies in the nature of democrats. Democrats are people who care about others.We care about the welfare and feelings of others. Republicans by nature are selfish and only lookout for themselves. Therefore, they don’t care how they sound or come off as long as it gets them what they want.
Democrats do not want to make anyone feel bad and less than human so we will soft peddle criticisms to the point that they sound less harsh.
At least that’s my take on it.

Karen,
We’re on the same page. I think Reid is doing a better job, but the Dem Senators like their independence too much.
Take a few of them to Dr. Frist’s cat behavior management seminar and that might change.

Mark Gredell–Are you from Illinois? Obama is a freshman Senator. He is far from useless. Do you know him? Have you read his book, spoken to him? Read his position on issues?

Bushboy is useless.

Bush is not a nice guy. He carried out a record number of executions in Texas without reviewing a single case. His political career revolves around smearing opponents and engaging in a wide spectrum of corrupt patronage, corporate handouts, and screwing the needy and disadvantaged. He is also responsible, as Commander in Chief, for the use of napalm and white phosphorous on Iraqi civilians. I don’t know who’s ass Obama’s head is up, but he apparently can’t see much from in there

Hi. Have to catch up. You’re all too fast for me….but keep it up. I love the info.

:)

Just posting now because, if this hasn’t come to your attention yet, the results of this survey are very interesting:

Do you believe President Bush’s actions justify impeachment?

Sorry if it’s been posted before, but wanted to make sure folks get to add their two cents.

Johnson was famous for being able to locate any politician whereever he was and talk to them, twist their arm. Who’s doing that now?
karen allen

Abramoff, until recently.

Seriously, give Harry Reid at least two cheers for keeping the Dems together for some key recent votes — something no one else has been able to do in years.

No, I didn’t call.
Didn’t even occur to me to call until I saw your post.

Yep, tomorrow would be a good day for an indictment.

Marky–In Robert Caro’s multi-volume biography of Lyndon Johnson, he goes into great detail how Johnson, as Speaker of the House, would buttonhole reps; in the hall, in the coatroom, in the dining room, to talk with them, cajole them, persuade them. Johnson was famous for being able to locate any politician whereever he was and talk to them, twist their arm. Who’s doing that now?

The wrong individuals represent us in the legislature. Mr. Obama may be a perfectly likeable, pleasant person in a social situation, acceptable as a member of your club, but as a progressive warrior? He is next to useless.

Barack Obama is a fantastic orator. He really moves each person in a gathering. One wants to jump and shout, “Yes, yes!”

Moi–Did you call? I called; Randy Samborn is not available and no one else will say anything. But no denials, either.

We can still hope Friday, December 23 is the day Rover gets indicted!

Karen,
“leaders” don’t accept direction from other “leaders” that’s my point.

Marky–But did the leaders, such as Harry Reid, take Obama aside and speak to him? Bet no one even thought of it.

Jane’s thread of how the Democrats are too tame and meek is correct. Perhaps Jane should run the Democratic party. At least things would get done then.

karen allen,
Call this number (312) 353-5300
and ask them if tomorrow’s Fitzmas. ;)

I’m not sure that Obama “buttering up” Bush before going on to bash him is so bad. It may actually be smart.

Then there’s this from the Chicago Trib:

“Yet Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) did accept an invitation to deliver the keynote address Saturday evening, despite repeated assertions he has no intention to seek higher office in 2008. But his mere presence in the Fantasia Ballroom at the Disney Contemporary Resort triggered a question among many in the crowd: Could he change his mind?

“It is time for us to lead. It is time for us to put aside whatever party identity crisis we’ve been having,” Obama said, urging party activists to get motivated for the political fight ahead. “Don’t let them tell you that we don’t know what we stand for as Democrats. We know who we are and we know what our legacy is.”

The message resonated with Francine Simmons, a Tampa stay-at-home-mother who was attending her first Democratic event. After more than two decades as a Republican, she said she has grown frustrated with Republicans over the war, the deficit and what she perceives as a lack of compassion for average Americans.

“He makes you feel that each of us can make a difference,” Simmons said after Obama’s speech. “He makes me feel empowered.”

http://www.chicagotribune.com/…..nworld-hed

Great sum-up…be sure to read Kennedy’s editorial in Boston Globe today- it is pretty scathing and a messege to other demo’s. Obama is still a rookie…and he still has to play the Manners Game. Note he did not say Dubya was a good prez….
Stop by http://watergatesummer.blogspot.com/ ,two new posts on the Illegal Spying…

Karen, there are plenty of leaders in the Democratic party..
There must be 20-30 leaders in the Senate alone.

With all due respect, I really think this is a trivial point. It’s a remark made in passing, and I don’t think it marginalizes anybody. It certainly does not make it easier to marginalize Bush-haters, nor does virtually anything that any Democrat does or says. The GOP slime machine lumbers along quite effectively no matter what Dems say.

The remark is irritating to me. But I — like you, and unlike the average nonpolitical yobbo — notice minutiae like that. I don’t think it’s correct to ascribe any real significance to it just because you — and I — don’t like it.

It’s a very distressing thought that the progressive blogosphere is that far ahead of the Washington progressives on getting the picture. I’ve often wondered why the Dems don’t get it that they only benefit the VRWC noise machine when they criticize thier own and push the Republican themes. It’s not like they don’t know it exists. Perhaps Will Rogers was right about not belonging to any organized political party. (”I’m a Democrat.”)

Amazing the extent to which the Democrats have avoided a paradigm shift.

The Repubs had their paradigm shift a long time ago. It brought Reagan to office. The traditional Republican base forged untion with the emerging religious right and that coalition brought them in. Sure they picked up some stray votes elsewhere, but this was the essential alliance.

They built on this paridigm shift over the years, adding to it to bring us the unholy alliance we know today.

Meanwhile, the Democrats, rather than building upon the emergence of the Deaniacs, moveon.rog, etc, instead as much kicked them in the ass.

I’m afraid the choices among the Dems are narrower than ever.

Hope you guys are covering the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals smackdown of the government on the Padilla
case.

Scathing rebuke of government motives and
actions.

Bomb thrower — I thought that was what Howard Dean was for. Tell the truth, everyone has a heart attack on the left, and then 6 months late his words become the truth. Eventually, the flavor of truth will become popular.

This ‘guy next door’ image has become really hard to displace. I bet Bush has even given Obama a nick name. I would bet that Bush has played the good ole boy jive with Obama. It is hard not to be impressed with the White House pomp and circumstance (almost typed poop and… maybe I should have not corrected my typo) and forget who one is working for.

He has gotten into some trouble before when everyone was upset with Durbin (think it was durbin) who dared to utter the word Nazi and then backed down. Let me make it clear, we were only upset at his backing down, not on the utterance.

We tried to make the point that this political correctness existing only on one side (the republicans show no such hesitancy to utter the unthinkable) must stop. But not sure Obama got the point. He wants to work with all members of the Senate he says. Good luck on that front Obama. What will it take for the D.C. dems to ‘get it.’

The comment made by Barack Obama exemplifies the weakness in the Deomcratic party. No one called him aside, and gently yet firmly told him any positive comment, even in a highly critical speech, would be extracted and used by the Repubs. In days past, it would have been resolved within minutes.

Barack is a nice person; however, he sometimes has his head in the clouds. He needs Democratic leadership guidance. Where is the leadership?

OT, from previous thread: In an article with Philippinenews.com, Susan Ralston expressed her displeasure that they had reported she has been questioned by Fitzgerald on two separate occasions. As to speculation if she was still working in the White House, Ralston said flippantly, “Call the White House directly at 202-456-1414 and ask them if I still work there.”

Just called that number today. They aren’t very happy Ralston put the number in the newspaper. After asking, “Why do you want to know? Who are you? What organization do you represent?”, the man finally replied, “Well, yes, Miss Ralston is employed by us.” But so touchy, so touchy.

There’s another take on it, again riffing on Swopa’s theme.
It’s quite likely that Obama, Biden and the other top dems no perfectly well the damage they do praising Bush’s character, but they also know that the “King”—the next Presidential nominee—should not be the one casting stones.
I’m sure Obama read Machiavelli too. .. I don’t remember which chapter of The Prince dealt with tactics for use by a legislative minority. Must have skipped that one.

Why don’t you take a minute and read the whole Obama speech?

Just asking.

swopa, you are right, but I also wonder, since the words coming out of so many democratic mouths in Washington are so mealy, so banal, so not in line with what progressive democrats are thinking, whether the view is very different for them up there than what we are seeing down here.

Better or worse? I haven’t a friggin’ clue. But sometimes, when I hear Joe Biden or Joe Lieberman, or even this example of Obama, I wonder what the hell they think they’re doing. It’s like they still think it’s a gentlemen’s club or something.

And they get played for thinking that.

In my world (finance/investments), calling someone a ‘nice guy’ is equivalent to calling him an idiot or a loser. Maybe Obama is trying to score some points on Wall Street with a backhanded insult.

Rich

I’m starting to think that we have a real serious “forest for the trees” problem. When somebody as decent and smart as Barack Obama doesn’t get it, maybe it’s because all of our elected representatives and the media that report on them are swimming around in the same fetid pool in Washington. The overview from out here in the ether probably affords us a better perspective on the Big Picture.

Maybe we need “government by blogging,” wherein our electeds stay home and do their business via the Internet from their respective districts. Sending them off to Washington at great expense clearly isn’t working.

Excellent point, swopa:
The GOP method would be to have King Obama praise Bush as a man, while mean Nancy Pelosi rips him a new asshole.

They’re unwilling to suffer the negatives they incur for being critical, so they wait for wait for others to kick up a stink…

Part of the problem is we don’t have a proper division of labor — we don’t have designated bomb-throwers/”bad cops” like Newt Gingrich to say rude things so that more moderate folks can play “good cop” and make the same points while seeming more agreeable.

Not Fitz.

O/T but you have to see this.

We’re becoming a “Show Me Your Papers” state.

Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place

Mon Dec 19, 7:31 PM ET

A bill on Gov. Bob Taft’s desk right now is drawing a lot of criticism, NewsChannel5 reported.
ADVERTISEMENT

One state representative said it resembles Gestapo-style tactics of government, and there could be changes coming on the streets of Ohio’s small towns and big cities.

The Ohio Patriot Act has made it to the Taft’s desk, and with the stroke of a pen, it would most likely become the toughest terrorism bill in the country. The lengthy piece of legislation would let police arrest people in public places who will not give their names, address and birth dates, even if they are not doing anything wrong.

WEWS reported it would also pave the way for everyone entering critical transportation sites such as, train stations, airports and bus stations to show ID.

“It brings us frighteningly close to a show me your papers society,” said Carrie Davis of the ACLU, which opposes the Ohio Patriot Act.

There are many others who oppose the bill as well.

“The variety of people who opposed to this is not just a group of the usual suspects. We have people far right to the left opposing the bill who think it is a bad idea,” said Al McGinty, NewsChannel5?s terrorism expert.

McGinty said he isn’t sure the law would do what it’s intended to do.

“I think anything we do to enhance security and give power to protect the public to police officers is a good idea,” he said. “It is a good law in the wrong direction.”

Gov. Bob Taft will make the ultimate decision on whether to sign the bill.

WEWS was told that Taft is expected to sign the bill into law, but legal experts expect that it will be challenged in courts.

If Bush loved the country so much, then why does he fuck up everything he puts his hand to? No-one could do so much wrong in such a short period of time. I think he ooes it on purpose.