Fitz! (?)

We just have to keep beating on these people (metaphorically, of course) until it sinks in.

Barbara has never seemed to me to be an intellectual powerhouse- but she’s one of our best allies in the senate.

I don’t expect any dems to come out in favor of Lamont.

I’d say “give her a break”.

Sounds like she’s just clueless.

Ever since Boxer wrote a novel (recently) I’ve wondered about her. I mean, is this a good thing to be doing while you in the Senate?

Barbara is not an idiot. She’s on the correct side of many, many of our issues.

“aids” s/b “aides.” I like Barbara Boxer on the whole, and I’m disappointed that she’s so out of touch on this issue. I hope that YK is a learning experience for her. I do recall reading once about her and Joe skipping out of a meeting of Democrats, arm in arm, abandoning an attempt to build a party position on some issue. Don’t recall more than that, though.

yes, what rwcole said.

OT: I’m way late with this, but I didn’t get online yesterday. Here are my favorite quotes from the Plame panel yesterday (some may be slightly inaccurate, I’m not great at taking notes):

Wilson:
“This is about war and why we wage it, not about Wilson.”

“What I did was not an act of moral courage or political courage, it was an act of civic duty.”

Murray Waas:
“What other stories are you *not* being told?”

emptywheel:
“The reason I got involved with this is that I didn’t want to happen what happened with Iran Contra. We never figured out how to explain it to people… [Iran-Contra figures coming back into government.] I want to tell it so these people won’t be around in twenty years.”

Larry Johnson:
“I’m a not a liberal, I’m a lifelong conservative — I don’t know what “conservative” means any more in light of this administration.”

Christy, on Rove (as good at snark on the fly as in writing):
“It is my understanding that the investigation is ongoing. That’s because Pat Fitzgerald said in his press conference that the investigation is ongoing.”

“I read in The Note today that Mary Matalin is hosting a $500 a plate fundraiser [for Libby’s legal defense], if anyone’s interested…”

Wilson:
“I have great faith in the institutions that underpin this democracy.”

Jane, about the contributions to the legal defense funds:
“This would be an appropriate subject for investigation, unlike the contents of Hillary Clinton’s underwear drawer.”

Wilson:
“I learned from Time magazine that my wife was the best shot with an AK-47 in her class at the CIA. Let me say that it has changed the nature of our relationship.”

Oops–wrong blog address in above post–I’ve moved from Blogger.com to WordPress.com, and I’m delighted that I did…

Also, I think the question needs to be more focused. She doesn’t have to disown Lieberman, but it would be great if she could scold him for not ruling out a run as an independent.
Forget trying to get a Democratic Senator to endorse Lamont, per se, I think.

sadly, i’ve come to the conclusion that bush isn’t the only one living in a bubble. sigh.

OT - jane, i saw earlier that you were looking for someone who’d tivoed the plame panel. sorry it wasn’t me, but i did rip an mp3 of it. thought it was all great - you can be very proud of your intro.

thanks to everyone who’s posted updates from vegas. i can’t even find the time to read them all… but i’ve enjoyed those i have read… wish i was there with you-all… hope there is a next year.

It’s obvious to me Barbara Boxer is clueless about the blogosphere or she would have never asked that question. Out of touch politicians kept in touch by talented staff. Guess who reads Wapo and the Times exclusively.

Redshift- you picked out some great comments- those are surely some of the ones I remember as classics!

I really think it would be a remarkable thing for any Senate Dem to come out in favor of one of their colleague’s primary opponents. I mean, she has to work with the guy, you know?

Let’s not harsh on Boxer. She’s the best friend we’ve got in the Senate next to Feingold.

I doubt her endorsement is going to impact Lamont’s chances. CT voters probably don’t want a Californian telling them how to vote, anyway.

Vegas!!!

Jane -
Thank you for reporting this. It makes a big difference whether politicians are here because they think it is good for them or if they are here because they agree with us. On the last thread, I asked the following:

I’m curious about the Warner party.

I think its great that he and other politicians came. I don’t think that it is fair for us to laud the fact that some politicians have shown up for the convention and then criticize them for doing so.

I think it is great that Warner showed up. Even better that he didn’t just come in, make a speech, and then leave.

Was he at the party? If so, did he really talk to people there? I mean, real conversation, not just photo ops? How familiar was he about the blogs? Did anyone speak to him? Please tell us about it.

How about the other candidates and their parties?

It didn’t get answered but doesn’t quite meet the criteria for EPU’d status. I’d be very interested in hearing from those of you fortunate enough to attend “live”!

Comment 0 sighting — I’m still seeing the “Sorry There Are No Comments Yet Posted” message. I’m guessing Comment 0 may be related to there being no comments when you first view the post, and refreshing before you comment, if that’s any help with tracking it down.

Is Boxer’s apparent cluelessness an indication that our message isn’t getting out in the manner we were hoping?

editorial note: backed up moments later in the hall

OfT - my nomination for the most apt (aptest? aptitudinest?) description of Ann Coulter, from Driftglass: http://driftglass.blogspot.com/

…the millions of rabid crab lice that have, until now, kept their arms linked in solidarity to form the blond bile delivery system known as “Ann Coulter”….

coulda sworn I typed “quotation marks” instead of %u201 - how forgetful of me….

I wonder if the point is to get to the staffers and interns that work for the members of Congress.

It’s a trusim that if you want to see the head honchos you make friends with their receptionists and secretaries. You make a note of appreciating how important they are, rather than treating them as nobodies.

It seems to me that some staffer is probably the one who has made up a dossier on Joe and his “support” among CT women for Boxer.

Couple that with an understandable unwillingness to dis a sitting memeber of her own party, I am not surprised with her statement.

But there is nothing to say she isn’t working behind the scenes or won’t come out, if Lamont wins the primary and throw her support behind him.

Since Lieberman won’t commit to supporting the Dem candidate, even if he loses, perhaps someone could ask other Dems what their view is of the situation.

Will they support whomever the Connecticut people choose to represent them as the Dem candidate?

Same applies for Tester in Montana.

You’re not going to hear any Democratic Senator endorsing a primary challenger to another Democratic Senator. No Way. No How.

And tonight I expect Harry Reid to be asked the same question and give a similar answer. Or something like “I’ll support the Democratic candidate on the ballot in November, whoever it is.”

I’m sorry to be OT, but does anyone know the time that Reid is speaking? I can only find TBD-to be determined at the AAR site, and no specifics at the YearlyKos details site.

sigh

On topic - I think Boxer is clueless, which is rather discouraging, any way you cut it.

Jane, you are so, everything, the Democratic party needs.

Basically, FDL and the rest of the liberal blogosphere, have created/assembled/educated a rapidly growing community that is a lot more fluent than the empty suits Democrats posturing as liberals. What’s normally “safe” for her to say at a political gathering isn’t very smart at YKos. She hasn’t caught up to that. She’s so much better that DiFi, Schumer, Joementum and all the Republicans, however, I think your position is very appropriate.
I guess she and the others have gotten so beaten up over the past few years, it takes time to realize that the political landscape is changing.
Did you get to see the replays of your panel?
As a Hollywood producer, I am sure it was not up to your standards, but I thought that was one hell of a panel. You had some heavy hitters and they all delivered. If anything I thought Ambassador Joe was the weakest and then maybe Larry. They are strong speakers, but in that competition, I thought they brought up the rear. Waas is killing, absolutely killing Byron York, with absolute kindness. Froomkin, how does he survive at the WaPo? Did you catch the shot he gave Harris? Christy, with that deadpan, dry sense of humor, “Fitzgerald said the investigation was ongoing.” Then emptywheel, “I would take any FDL reader over ABC’s the note.”
I hope you are having a great time.

Terre: he’s on the sked for 7:30

Hope the primary battle in Connecticut doesn’t end up being so divisive that it pits Lamont supporters against most dems in the party. That would be a nightmare- about the worst possible outcome.

To misquote Murray Waas: If Boxer was not aware of the netroots opposition to Lieberman, what other stories aren’t being told to her?

I think this gaff is more of a warning for us to not overestimate the influence we are having on politicians than a sign that Boxer is either an idiot or a liar.

No, no, let’s be harsh. Real harsh. We’re not spared by these motherfuckers. EVER. So why should they get a passfrom us?

Boxer’s not “clueless” — she’s an idiot. A Useful Idiot. Not to be trusted from here to the door. The sooner that fact is understood the better, if only for our own sanity.

Yes, I know Kos is trying to transform politics from the inside, but take it from an old outsider (who’s not getting any younger) transformational politics is a contradicion in terms. And the terms are enunciated by Boxer and her ilk.

How can she claim that Holy Joe is good on women’s issues after his Beyond Disgusting remarks about rape victims?

Simple.

“It’s all politics, darling — and we’ve got to be practical after all.”

This is reason why whatever “alternative” might arise to stve off the Hillary juggernaut won’t be any much different from her.

This is the reason why I’m an anarchist.

(Insert Maureen Stapleton in Reds. That’s me, folks! Different outfit of course. But. . .)

JC- probably a mistake to get into ranking the panelists. I thought that the different perspectives were so complementary. And really, what did more did you expect of Wilson? He was gracious and humorous. And, he *does* read FDL. I thought everyone was top notch on that panel. And, re: an earlier comment of yours- I too thought when I watching that Jane had a superb sense of “timing”.

This is unfortunate because I saw Boxer’s speech at YearlyKos and she had many good points to make.

I’ll assume she hasn’t been quite informed about Lieberman’s horrible stance on gay rights and contraception medication.

But what is actually troubling is that she would chide a reported for asking a valid question of her. If she was awake for any of YearlyKos and has any sense of the progressive movement in America, she’d realize that we are very much dedicated to debate and discussion, rather than just spewing preformed opinion.

Renato, rwcole — I’ll just shut up with my girl issues and stand over in the corner. I realize there are much more important things, I’m probably just having a bout of PMS. I should’ve asked you boys first. My bad.

OfT Mark Warner’s Nukes
by emptywheel
“Well, it appears to be all Warner all day today.
Someone mistook me for a bigtime blogger and I got invited to attend Mark Warner’s post-talk blogger chat. I asked the first question, which went something like:…”
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.c.....rs_nu.html

Ah….the little rooters get a spoonful of….Adult Medicine. That line is more sarcastic than intended; but perhaps conveys a point. I think it’s “pie-in-the-sky” thinking to expect a sitting Senator to come out and endorse another sitting Senator’s opponent. Boxer MUST work with Lieberman…unless or until he is defeated, or retires. And no, I respectfully disagree with Ms. Hamsher’s comment that it’s the “incumbency protection racket”.

Change the facts. It’s 2010. SENATOR Lamont is asked about fellow Senator “X” who’s in a battle with some challenger. Senator “X” has a spotty record on women’s issues. Do you REALLY expect Senator Lamont to come out and “dis” Senator “X”???? Trust me….Lamont won’t. There are battles to be fought….and there are battles which are little more than rabbit trails.

Slamming Ms. Boxer is a rabbit trail. Just how much goodwill do you earn from this Senator by calling her clueless? Look, I think Ms. Hamsher is correct on her facts about Lieberman’s record with women…but I disagree with her choice to battle Boxer over this.

Pick and choose your battles wisely. You can be real loud, and a loser. OR, you can be wise, and check fire on occasion, but still win the war. Boxer, in my opinion, is a friend. I encourage all to treat her as such. Yep, she’s WRONG on Lieberman’s record. So….execute her, or keep her around?
Ghostman

There’s one thing everyone at Kos must understand. A sizeable portion of the Democratic Party is more than happy with its minority status and is highly resistant to putting it in the driver’s seat.

Graft gets paid, the “trains run on time,” and all’s well — with them.

Us? Well we can go Cheney ourselves.

I’m perfectly serious about this, folks.

Point well taken VG.

“Just how much goodwill do you earn from this Senator by calling her clueless?”

Who gives one withered shit about her “goodwill”?

Jane!!!!! No, no, please don’t shut up!!!! *some* guys are a tad or more sexist, and they don’t even know it.

THANK YOU Lina!!! :)

So tired of hearing “Please tune back during broadcast hours.” pffft

coming to the defense of Senator Barbara Boxer: she is one of 2 Senators from a hugumongous state and her instincts (voting and talking) have consistently been good over the years. She has two staffs to keep her going: her official Hill workers and also a political campaign staff. Both staffs are supposed to keep her informed on things she will have to deal with. Somebody should have briefed her on the Lamont/Lieberman kerfuffle as a hot netroots issue. Bad aides fell down on the job!

pacifica 16: I’m unclear how much Warner talked with people. Unfortunately, the top of the Stratosphere wasn’t a very good space for talking to more than a few people. It was basically a big ring around the outside of a tower. I only saw Warner once (other than on the way in, when he said hello and shook hands), when he and Markos were talking to as large a group as could gather, but that could have been because he was circulating in the same direction I was.

Warner didn’t take questions after his speech, but he did talk to bloggers outside afterwards (intentionally, not because they cornered him.) There were some podcasters recording, and the press around, but he was specifically talking to the bloggers and not the press.

The Plame panel was one of the most refreshing things I’ve seen in a long time. Great minds, eloquently seeking a return to America as it should be.

I think it’s great that OldMedia is there. We’ve got their attention, but they don’t seem to know what to make of us. Neither the York piece nor Maureen Dowd’s came out as the smack-downs I’d anticipated. I think they’re confused - looking for the angle - what is it that YKos is really about? They gottabe angling for something - everybody does - in their worlds, anyway. They really just haven’t figured out what to make of people who are pursuing something selflessly instead of selfishly.

Mommybrain’s son just asked op99 about her button, and she explained that it was a picture of George Bush kissing Joe Lieberman. His understandable reaction: “Eeew!”

Clearly, the kid’s inherited good political instincts!

Josh Marshall is starting to track Senators on Net Neutrality — Monday needs to be day one of a netroots fax bombing offensive. The Senators who think they can huff and puff and take the cash stuffed envelope from the telcos are sadly mistaken.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c.....008702.php

Starting Monday — faxes, emails, and phone calls. Let the “Honorables” know the internets belong to everyone.

I don’t think any politician should be let off the hook or “given a break” for anything. If you are against anything they say, you should let them know. Because of the extreme suckiness (suckitude? high suckosity factor?) of most politicians, they need to be called on the carpet every chance there is. We essentially hire them (except chimpy) and pay their salaries. When you are at a restaurant, you wouldn’t say “well, I really like the burger so I’m not going to complain about the pubic hair in my fries.”

I think I’ll go give Lamont another donation.

Redshift: either that or the kid’s a Junior Homophobe ! (i’m still feeling the buzz of 6 hours today at Indy Gay Pride)

jayt,

“The Plame panel was one of the most refreshing things I’ve seen in a long time. Great minds, eloquently seeking a return to America as it should be.”

C-SPAN agrees evidently. They’ve showed it THREE TIMES so far and a 4th is coming up Sunday!!!

So C-SPAN viewers get to hear Jane’s Susan Schmitt = Steno Sue once again! LOL

sigh: Babs, Babs, Babs….
and she’s our good Dem Senator.
Wish she was a bit more in tune with all this.

Great comment jayt at 6:24.

Redshift 40 - Thank you! Would love to hear from someone in that conversation!

I think it’s “pie-in-the-sky” thinking to expect a sitting Senator to come out and endorse another sitting Senator’s opponent.

Boxer said Lieberman is good for women, which is idiotic. She could back Lieberman without saying something so stupid.

Keep up the fight, Jane!

ck 43 -

Yeah ‘net neutrality is HUGE.

And you can be sure The Deciderer, tired of all the “opinionating” that goes on (he used that word the other day, LOL), would love for the highways of the internets become more few.

Bet good money that Boxer’s comments are a symptom of a problem. Boxer may not be the actual problem, but she’s the only one who can change it.

We’ve got a similar problem here in MI with a certain pol, out of touch with the people and going to get a serious *sswhupping based on the feedback I got today from voters. Great person, very smart, been with us on the issues, but definitely has been out of touch with the facts on the ground.

What’s the problem? Agressive staffers who screen everything for the pol — and I’ll bet you that’s Boxer’s problem. They help the pol here stay focused and on task, to the detriment of understanding what’s really going on around them, to the detriment of the people believing in her and what’s she’s done for them. They really can’t see it from where they are at; they simply don’t see her.

Which brings me back to Boxer: how can anyone who’s savvy enough to post at DailyKos NOT understand what’s going on with Lieberman?? This is a disconnect - unless the staffers have been handling the posting work, and/or Boxer and staff are only using DailyKos for a mouthpiece instead of using DailyKos as a two-way intelligence system.

Boxer’s the only one who can fix this. She’s got a great opportunity to play catch-up right now, what with a great post on the front page at DailyKos by Georgia10 on Lieberman at this very moment. Boxer needs to realize in a hurry she’s rallying behind an Independent and NOT a Democrat.

Babs needs a swig of the Cool-Aid
she’s Cool-less in this instance

Hello everyone. Can I just say how grateful I am that not only are Jane and Christie, Pach and so many others, working at this conference but they’re also managing to log in here, too? Multi-tasking squared.

Barbara Boxer probably has done some good stuff in her day, but like so very many other people in Washington who have been occupying the same seat for lo these many years, she is painfully out of touch with what’s going on. That she can’t know what lots of Democrats are feeling about Leiberfutz is just unforgiveable at this point in time. NOT to have a staff that gets around and NOT to have anybody’s finger on the pulse is completely stupid. “Why are you so focused on Lieberman?” Geeze, does she really need someone to connect those dots? Why was she there?

They’re ALL clueless. Why does one bother???

I think I’ll just maybe mention exemplary candidates like Lamont when I write my Net Neutrality reminder to BB on Monday. I drop Russ Feingold’s name a lot, too.

John Casper -

thanks very much for that emptywheel link - very appropos of this thread -

always been easy to appreciate her mind here among the Plameologists, but yesterday, her heart made me cry (”Mom, what’s the matter ?”) when she spoke of her reasons for working on Plame

would love. love. love, to hear Jerome’s opinion on that Warner answer, I know he backs him bigtime, but that’s a serious red flag - guess I’ll have to do some reading about the good Gov., sounds a little too Shrummy for me

Jane:

I didn’t see your earlier post, but I did TiVo the Plame panel.

I’m sort of a techno-dud, but I do know how to burn a DVD of it.

Just ask, and I’ll provide.

Jane Fish

Rayne, I agree. I think she’s more exhibiting ivory tower syndrome and figures Lieberman’s the best they can do. Plus, he’s the incumbent so why make a big deal of it?

I think a good response to “Why are you so focused on Lieberman?” would be “Why do you *think*?” In fact for politicians, since their job is to represent their constituents, perhaps the best way to get it through her head is to let her remain clueless and feel out of the loop. THAT is something that we all know politicians will respond to.

with the exposure FDL gets, I am sure some staffer soon will brief Senator Boxer about her gaffe.

When ‘push comes to shove’ the NeoCons hang together. Barbara is another one of those Senators who believes we should be remaking the Middle East…even if we act as barbarians in destroying one of the great cultures in this world.

This is a disconnect - unless the staffers have been handling the posting work, and/or Boxer and staff are only using DailyKos for a mouthpiece instead of using DailyKos as a two-way intelligence system.

Well, there are gradations between posting a daily diary and knowing how to troll-rate and not being able to tell the internets from a fishing net.

How involved was Boxer with her fellow Kossacks?

Or did she only appear in the role of Senator?

Did any of the “big (but not blogger) names” get down with “jes folks”?

JAne you are RIGHT ON…..If Boxer makes a gaff and doesn’t know what the hell is going on…she needs to be told IMMEDIATELY, what is up…How could she NOT know Rape gurney Joes record on women and gay rights?…GEEEEEEEEEEEEezzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
She made a good speech and she is a pretty reliable ally, but like the rest of them NEVER TRUST HER!!!!!! Keep her in line by letting her know we know what is going on, and YOU JANE KNOWS what the hell is going on…..
Got yer back!!!!!!!

OT - but important.

I don’t think I’m being hyperbolic in saying that if we lose Net Neutrality we lose FDL.

Maybe not right away, but shortly.

Free exchange of ideas is too important, and dangerous, for “them” to allow it.

That being said, I have no idea how I can make a difference. I make my calls, and faxes, but is that all I can do?

I feel so fucking powerless, and I’m terrified that we could lose this vehicle, and any shot of true democracy.

Guide me fellow ‘pups.

“I know you probably look at Washington and think it’s impossible to develop a consensus in Washington, D.C. It probably seems that way, doesn’t it, when you pay attention to all the sharp elbows being thrown and, you know, the people opinionating and screaming and hollering and calling each other names…”

The Decider

Digby has a great post on GOP Bid’ness — pushing the legal envelope, in the same way the Mafia pushes the envelope.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com.....4068518357

Californian here, a little miffed with Jane. Out of touch, I would’ve used, I’m okay with railing at Boxer for self-destructive oldboyism. But idiot, that got my back up a little. Does she deserve no credit for how she went after Rice during her confirmation hearing? Standing up and, to her face, questioning her ‘commitment to the truth?’ I thought the number of Dem senators putting their chins that far out was small enough that we wouldn’t throw insults like this at one of them lightly, over an offhand boilerplate remark like that.

*ilson- I hope so, but there have been plenty of FDL posts by Jane and others on this issue, before now. Were they not paying attention?

Ed Deevy: Senator Boxer voted against the War Authorization and has long opposed the War on Iraq. True, she has been an over-enthusiastic supporter of Israeli policies but she’s no NeoCon !

I think I will call Boxer’s office on Monday and ask them to explain how she could be so unaware of the netroots position on Lieberman that she would openly support him at Y-KOS.

People, we are way past the need to make nice. I’m not interested in parsing empty “endorsements” or trying to understand the yes on Alito and the yes on Hayden and the fucking faux outrage about Bush when it all boils down to watching this messed up Congress do their time. I’m not a moderate and I don’t pretend to be a moderate. I’m not going to go along with a politician because it’s a calculated risk. If someone wants to choose Liebermann when there’s Lamont, well, I can’t get on that bus. I want to completely believe in the person I vote for. We are in deep shit and I will definitely harsh on the mellow when the chips are down. There are ISSUES and nothing these nibs can say will distract me from their actions.

Urban Pirate 66 -

Yep. The Bush Crony Suits wanna turn the ‘net into a cable TV business model. Content control will not be far behind price tiering. Read Lessig’s latest OpEd in WaPo the other day.

What is Plan B if net neutrality doesn’t pass?

Is there an opening for a new ISP that doesn’t limit the flow of packages or whatever it is that streams the information we get?

I appreciate the best option is not to have to have a plan b but does anyone know a workaround?

I think we have an obligation to be as harse with Dems as with everyone, and simply because Boxer is a women and said this, I agree with Jane totally.

The only thing for Boxer to do is to correct herself immediately, and I’m sure she will. Give her time.

From firedog central in the halls of the Riviera Convention Center, we have discovered our new best friend. She is Natasha who blogs at Pacific Views on national and international issues. In contrast to some of us (me) who tuned out half of what Warner had to say, Natasha actually paid attention and has a really insightful post just going up at her blog. She has blogged extensively on Venezuela and Iran, and took BIG exception to some of the crap Warner had in his stump speech. Hop on over if you want to see the most substantive reaction I have yet seen to Warner’s speech.

Boxer needs to show up every damn day!

cbl at 58:

I have another question I’d like someone to ask Jerome about Warner.

I could swear I heard him say on a radio interview that he didn’t support single-payer health insurance - - or maybe it was universal health insurance. I can’t remember for sure, now.

I’d sure like to hear that confirmed or debunked, because I just can’t see a Democrat being a serious candidate without putting universal health insurance at the top of his or her list.

Bionic at 64:

I don’t know about the others, but my husband found himself chatting with Wes Clark the first night. I’m pretty sure he was mixing and mingling.

How hard is it to tell a staffer to read one of the blogs a couple times a week?

Bionic 75 -

We will have to fight long and loud to assure that this doesn’t happen. The two prevailing analogies of “cable TV” and “gated communities” are quite apt. It’s not about some “new ISP” coming in to save the day. It’s about control of “the last mile,” e.g., which, for me, is Cox.net, my cable TV/cable modem provider. They are the only option I have as a private consumer at true broadband speed. DSL sucks by comparison, and no one’s gonna run a T-1 into my house (at any practical cost).

What are the implications of the net neutrality issue for how the whole rest of the (non-U.S.) world experiences the net?

Ed at 62:

Didn’t Boxer vote against the war? Seems like that would disqualify her from being a NeoCon.

I know BobbyG.

It would shut down the “idea marketplaces” in no time flat. Blogs, Usergroups, etc would be monitored and controlled by someone whose agenda may differ. Someone who could prevent what you and I are doing right now.

Fucking terrifying.

They never saw this coming, and its got them shit-scared. They want control back.

Where does that leave us?

Jane,
I’ve been wanting to delurk about the phrase “Rape Gurney Joe” for a while. Even though it neatly sums up the entire reason Lieberman needs to be ditched, it made me uncomfortable, because it reminds me of some of the rhetoric used by the anti-abortion crazies. (They use a shorthand which is damn near unintelligible, i.e. mill = abortion mill = abortion clinic.)
I’ve been rethinking this lately, since I’ve been talking to my mother-in-law, who lives in CT, about Ned Lamont. Because you refer to Lieberman as Rape Gurney Joe every single time you post about him, I was reminded about his outrageous statement about emergency contraception, and passed it on. The MIL was appropriately shocked, and is now fired up to go vote in the Democratic primary for the first time in her life. This is really the first time I’ve personally observed the netroots in action, from FDL to me to MIL to the voting booth.
Finally, Barbara Boxer is neither an idiot nor a liar. She has worked tirelessly for women for many, many years, as well as opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning. (Remember her questioning of Condoleeza Rice at her confirmation hearing?) I think she may simply need to be educated. She is savvy enough to recognize the importance of the netroots and reach out to them, but most likely simply does not know what some of the most important issues have become. I have a feeling that will change.

I haven’t read the comments yet and am about to.

But my reaction to the post: this country is fucking finished, it’s done and what we’re all talking about here is what’s going to be built on its ashes by thinking humans.

There is simply no saving any of this in its present terminally sick context.

jlr -

We wanna end up with a China-esqe internet, probably even worse?

WRT Boxer I think it is the common sense test, if any of us had gone to this convention to give a speech and to connect with political bloggers, we would have had staff brief us on, oh say, what political issues have been showing up on blogger screens and what their take was. We’re pretty much used to Bush and everybody else in his Administration never doing their homework. It would be nice if one of our own showed some aptitude in that direction instead of being blindsided by the obvious.

I don’t know if this suggestion has been made before, but it would be nice if there was a daily or weekly progressive blog executive summary that interested parties could have delivered by email. I’m thinking 3-5 short bullet points with the issues that are hot for the combined blogosphere. Could include links to significant posts.

I think it would be more realistic to think that Boxer could keep up on an executive version of the blogs. We would not be so dependent on middlemen (aides) to keep her informed. If she needs more information on a topic, she can ask her aides for it or read the actual blogs.

It would be great to have a slightly more expanded version of this in the MSM. In the 9 months that I’ve been reading FDL, I think that of the 100 or so people that I’ve tried to get to read the blogs I’ve had one success. Many people believe that they just don’t have the time.

“If someone wants to choose Liebermann when there’s Lamont, well, I can’t get on that bus.”

Time to throw her UNDER that bus!

This notion that Boxer’s staff has created a bubble for her is hilarious. The woman is a politician who lives in the same spacio-temporal dimension as the rest of us. She’s not stupid.

She is immoral.

I can’t stop listening to “Sing Your Life” by Morissey. My favorite song ever, I think, and definitely my anthem.

“Does she deserve no credit for how she went after Rice during her confirmation hearing? “

No.

She’s too savvy to be clueless, IMHO. She’s hedging her bets and not bucking the party line as long as Lieberman still looks like he could win against Lamont. These guys CAN’T be seen as speaking out against Lieberman, unfortunately, because it would look like the Dem party had completely ruptured.

I guess my question wasn’t clear - Can American legislation against net neutrality affect how the rest of the world experiences the internet? It would create a Chinese-type internet for Americans AND the rest of us?

Pacifica — Have you visited or thought about recommending www.memeorandum.com — it provides key news stories and links all the blogs reporting on the different stories — and it updates every 5 minutes. I think it is a good introduction and way to find an overview of what’s happening.

oops that’s Morrissey with two r’s, sorry

Did someone say Morissey?

“Take me out tonight
Where there’s music and there’s people
And they’re young and alive
Driving in your car
I never never want to go home
Because I haven’t got one
Anymore
Take me out tonight
Because I want to see people and I
Want to see life
Driving in your car
Oh, please don’t drop me home
Because it’s not my home, it’s their
Home, and I’m welcome no more
And if a double-decker bus
Crashes into us
To die by your side
Is such a heavenly way to die
And if a ten-ton truck
Kills the both of us
To die by your side
Well, the pleasure - the privilege is mine
Take me out tonight
Take me anywhere, I don’t care
I don’t care, I don’t care
And in the darkened underpass
I thought Oh God, my chance has come at last
(But then a strange fear gripped me and I
Just couldn’t ask)
Take me out tonight
Oh, take me anywhere, I don’t care
I don’t care, I don’t care
Driving in your car
I never never want to go home
Because I haven’t got one, da …
Oh, I haven’t got one
And if a double-decker bus
Crashes into us
To die by your side
Is such a heavenly way to die
And if a ten-ton truck
Kills the both of us
To die by your side
Well, the pleasure - the privilege is mine
Oh, There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out
There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out
There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out
There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out
There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out
There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out
There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out
There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out
There Is A Light And It Never Goes Out”

Boxer made an ignorant, ill informed comment and was rightfully slapped for it. Isn’t that part of what we do here???

BobbyG –

It seems Cox.net has been blocking Craigslist for several months; it doesn’t want a free service competing with paid classifieds.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Foremski/index.php?p=86

One of the planks of the neocon agenda is uncritical support for Israel. Another is the use of American military might to accomplish our foreign policy objectives. Boxer shares the first of these with many politicians on both sides of the aisle. She does not support the second.

Renato, rwcole %u2014 I’ll just shut up with my girl issues and stand over in the corner. I realize there are much more important things, I’m probably just having a bout of PMS. I should’ve asked you boys first. My bad.

jane, would you bear my children for me. I think I love you even more now!

Barbara Boxer is probably not ill-informed, probably not an idiot, and only occasionally a liar. That Lieberman is on the wrong side of history about the war and about societal issues that affect women is not something she is unaware of. I think all elected officials in this country end up becoming isolated from “the rest of us”. As the progressives become noisier (at least as noisy as the far right), she will pay better attention. And until she feels she needs to be more worried about “us” than she does about Lieberman supporters in her party, she will exhibit signs of defensiveness like she did at YK.

1. “how could Boxer not have known this is a focus of us being here?” (the Lamont thing)….well….is it??? I thought this is a convention to energize progressive Democrats, NOT the “Lamont Does Vegas” convention.
2. Several folks have pointed out Boxer’s damn good record on many other issues. I think she deserves some credit.
3. And Pacifica….that is you who is referred to earlier by “my dear friend” (yes, I’m being sarcastic) op99? (chuckle)….Anyways, I think your idea above is good. Some sort of “hot sheet”. Good idea.
Ummm…I did go over and read your post. Don’t agree at all with your thoughts on Chavez, and Mr. “A” (the iranian guy, his spelling befuddles me)…but that’s another conversation for another time!
Ghostman

Matt Stoller on Craigslist being Coxed –

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/6/8/144357/7525

If you want to energize progressives I’d suggest that insulting them by backing Lieberman is not the way to do it.

Pacifica @27

I’m with you, and Jane.

When I read Jane’s description of Boxer as “clueless” I kinda winced about how that word could be taken out of context, but if you read the post as whole, it is clear that Jane is amazed (not in a good way), that Boxer was unaware
1) that progressive Bolostan does not love joementum

2) that Holy Joe has a dreadful position with repsect to woman victims of sex crimes

While I would not expect her to publicly repudiate a fellow Dem Senator over a plicy difference, she sure as hell should have come to YKOS prepared for the question.

I know that Jane can speak for herself, but I think we share a disappointment(that was not the first word I typed, I’m being diplomatic here) that Boxer would be so disrespectful as to show up so unprepared.

In a weird way I think this is a good thing though. It is a reality check. YKOS generated so much adrenaline that I think we were all starting to believe our own press.

Yes the message is STARTING to get out, but no, it is not ubiquitous, YET. We will get there. This is a great start. But it is only a start.

Also, those of us home on our comfy couches should realize how tired, how wired and how overstimulated all our “live” attendees are.

So shuld anyone reading these late posts. Everybody is tired. Me, I got a fever of 103, so the goddess only knows what I am writing.

It all can’t be perfect all the time.

This year politicians and MSM came, unprepared and “clueless” to find out what we are all about. Next year, they will come preapred to engage us in constructive dialogue, if we don’t tune them out or turn them off before they get to know us and find out why we are so worthwhile.

I could understand Boxer not being critical of Lieberman if the Democrats like the Republicans had some common stand on the issues but they don’t. How hard is it to say then that she disagrees with Lieberman on many of these issues but that she is willing to stand by the choice of the people of CT whatever that might be? She is a politician, isn’t she? She does know how to say these things, right? Maybe she was the one with PMS.

Boxer’s response shows the arrogance of the DC crowd and the need to clean house. If they don’t understand their constituency and aren’t willing to respond to a straight question addressing a real concern, then get them outta there.

alton,
IMO, the “rape gurney” is very accurate about a woman’s situation after she is raped. She has to climb off the gurney and drag herself to a place where she can get emergency contraception. None of that is rhetoric it’s an attempt to avoid pregnancy.
The socalled pro-lifers paraded around bloody bottles filled with full grown fetuses which is completely inaccurate, because that’s not what a zygote looks like. It wasn’t rhetoric either, it’s just plain wrong.
You wrote: “Finally, Barbara Boxer is neither an idiot nor a liar.”
If you’ll read Jane’s post, “I like many things about Barbara Boxer so I’m going to assume here that she’s an idiot and not a liar.”
Jane’s post doesn’t debate Barbara Boxer’s record on these iss