During last night's AFL-CIO Presidential Forum, after the seven (no Gravel) Democratic candidates gave their usual responses to Keith Olbermann's intelligent questions, the forum turned to questions for the audience. It was the most important moment in the debate, because we heard questions we rarely hear from the usual debate hosts. But these were the right questions.
One woman stood up and described how she lost her husband in the Sego Mine disaster and noted that six miners were now trapped in a mine in Utah. She wanted to know, "Why aren't the mine and worker safety laws being enforced?" Good question.
Another woman, unemployed, described how she and others had lost their jobs because they tried to organize a union, and she wanted to know why America couldn't enforce its own labor laws.
The next person, an older gentlemen, took a moment to rise because he was on crutches. After he rose and began to speak, the tears rolled down his face but he hung in there. He described how forced retirement had cost him his job, and after his company folded how he'd lost one third of his pension and his family's health care. And he described what it was like sitting at the breakfast table every morning with his wife of 34 years, now ailing, knowing that he could not afford to pay for her health insurance. And he looked straight at the candidates and said,
"What's wrong with America, and what would you do to fix it?"
And you knew he wasn't asking some general question nor speaking only to the candidates. He was speaking to all of us, to all Americans and to its leaders, asking how could we let this happen? How could we have a country in which decent people could worked hard all their lives only to find they had no retirement security and couldn't get health care? And why should ordinary Americans have to be concerned not only about their kids' schooling now but their kid's future when they starting looking for meaningful jobs?
As KO noted afterward, the country is waiting, longing for a leader to respond to these questions.
My view about these debates/forums is that whatever they do for the individual candidates -- and they seem at least to be helping Hillary Clinton strengthen her status as front runner -- they are great for the Democratic Party, because collectively they have good answers to most of these questions and more. And their answers are getting better as they debate each other.
I disagree with those who want the field to be winnowed, to have fewer on the stage so we can dig deeper into their views. We don't need that now, and taking people off the stage would serve only to take good policy critiques and policy options like single-payer health care and campaign financing off the stage with them.
The debates they're having now over foreign policy, or health care details and trade provisions are helping all of them refine the larger Democratic message. They are collectively writing the Democratic platform, instead of leaving that to the front runner a year before the conventions. They are all getting better, and Kucinich, who helps keep them all honest, reminds people that short men are not stupid or weak, and can rally the country. And it just makes me smile to wonder what Chris Matthews must think when his post-debate "experts" all agree that Kucinich did great.
The Party looks best when they're all on that stage, jockeying with each other to be sure, but it's a good debate, framing and clarifying the issues, and giving us one opportunity after another to show how George Bush and his Republican Party have trashed the country. The debates are showcasing to the American people that the Democrats are ready to take the Presidency and lead the country. When the American people watch this group have their crisp, rational debates, watch them discuss the details of health care proposals, and watch the Democrats show their passion for fixing the problems ordinary Americans really care about, and then compare that to the group of clowns on the Republican side as they debate their flip flops on abortion or gay marriage or pretend that terms like "socialism" have some relevance to the majority of Americans, I think we win. We win big.
And when Hillary told the audience near the end that in the next Democratic Administration there will be plenty of work to do and invited people who wanted to help to come to Washington, she got the message right: "Bring your brooms and bring your mops, because we have to clean house."
More, please. (And thanks to Crooks and Liars for getting the videos up so quickly. More videos are available here.)
Photo: AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast, MSNBC AFL-CIO Presidential Forum
Login Here
Share This
Spotlight
Thanks for this, Scarecrow. Makes a nice counterpoint to the coverage of this provided by the Nice Polite Republicans on my radio this morning.
yo
Nice piece Scarecrow.
Good morning. I agree. The Ds talk in simple declarative sentences that explain and address real problems. It’s a huge change from the R propaganda machine of the last 6 years and the incoherent R candidates. (Leaving aside for the moment the issue of whether the Ds will do anything they are promising.)
Well said, Scarecrow. As much as these debates can be frustrating from the perspective of the “horse race,” they are quite reassuring when you step back and look at the whole stage.
And after reading Digby’s look at our torture program, it’s good to find some reason to hope.
I disagree with those who want the field to be winnowed, to have fewer on the stage so we can dig deeper into their views.
I’d like to see the field widened, meself. Think about having Al Gore up there, providing his answers.
What’s wrong with America and what would you do to fix it?
Oh, lordy, Scarecrow. Talk about bedrock. What, indeed?
We are indeed looking for a real leader. I look at this passel of presidential wannabes with strange detachment. I guess I don’t want to/can’t believe this is as good as it gets. That these are the best of the best.
I’ve made no secret of my hope that Al Gore will enter the fray. Is he the answer? I don’t know anymore. But I used to have a mind-picture of Gore taking the oath of office, removing his suitcoat, rolling up his sleeves, and saying to the assembled masses:
“Got no time for speeches. We’ve got work to do. Let’s roll.”
(sigh)
let me count the ways! for starters, how about examining the gao report re almost 200,000 AK 47 weapons that are not accounted for AND the petraeus connection?
None of the Dems is calling for the cruel and self-righteous America envisioned by the Republican candidates. No “double Gitmos” here.
Scarecrow, you make beautiful arguments for keeping these debates going and open to all the candidates. What’s the big rush to discard ideas/candidates all ready? According to my calendar, it’s only August 8, 2007.
caws!
Phoenix Woman @ 1
I had NPR on for over an hour as I got ready for work this morning and didn’t hear a single mention of this.
It’s sad that I have to go onto web sites like this to get the important news. Once I’m in my car I just listen to the podcast of the previous day’s Thom Hartmann show. I find I’m better informed listening to day-old commentary from Thom Hartmann than if I listened to live NPR.
But thanks for this Scarecrow, this is a particularly moving post and I’ll probably e-mail it to some of my friends if that’s okay.
That man made me cry. He was the Indian on the plain looking at the wasted potential of America.
Kucinich is my idea of a leader and understands what a good government could actually be for its’ citizens.
The one item that is the most important thing is Medicare for All!
FWIW, the candidates should have responded to any infrastructure and debt issues by replying “This is your government on Conservatism. This is the Government that got its power by pandering to your fears.”
oddball @ 12
I don’t think it’s totally accurate to say the government is pandering to our fears. Chicken egg thingie. Where did the fear come from in the first place? They are feeding the beastie that they birthed.
bill @ 8
“General (betrayus) Blames Clerical Errors in the Cast of Missing Arms”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....01726.html
Part of a comments quote from a military mom:
Great!! We have supplied the insurgency with more weapons than the Iranians…….
And I get to send my son there in January….G R E A T F’N G R E A T
Washington Journal just had a segment from the GAO on the topic.
I missed most of it but hope for a possible replay sometime today.
Enough with the B/S about cleavage and third wives. The audience questions from the AFL-CIO forum brought me chills. I wish those questions were being asked every day by the MSM. I also wish if candidates or officials won’t answer them clearly and directly, reporters would get in their faces and demand answers. Apparently that is a lost cause. Therefore, we need to do it.
I too wish Gore was in the field, but that is looking less likely. Absent Gore, Edwards owns these issues and as I’ve said before HRC is republican-lite
I’m practical enough to realize Kucinich doesn’t have a chance, but I’m so glad he’s running and I’ll probably send him money (again) just to make sure he stays in the picture as long as possible.
Of all the candidates he’s my absolute favorite on the issues, but sadly so much more comes into play in our political climate than just issues.
All of the other candidates give me SERIOUS concerns in at least a few areas, but I think I could eventually get behind any of them but Hillary.
Unfortunately she seems to be the one ordained by the corporatocracy to protect their interests.
Waccamaw @ 14
I’d sum it up as staggering indifference
It makes me smile to read that you are wondering what Chris Matthews thinks about his panel’s praising Kucinich’s performance. I agree that Kucinich was on fire last night. This was definitely his crowd.
Tailoring tip for Kucinich: Shorten your damn shirt sleeves–or wear sleave garters. When you gesture, your sleeves come halfway down your hands making you look very much like a puppet. It knocks a good twenty to thirty percent off your credibility.
If Matthews had only audio of the debates, undistracted by Kucinich’s height or puppet hands, he would have found Kucinich powerful and manly.
barbara @ 13
Agreed, but America needs to get past the US v. Them mentality. The Repugs seem to continue to feed from this trough and then spew their fear. The Dems need to hang that Albatross around their neck.
We also need a leader that can talk about the true Social Contract that every American has, just by virtue of being an American.
Vote Kucinich. (I was an Edwards guy until last night.)
Chris Matthews infuriated me in the post debate show(I fired him in the comments of Eli’s post last night,lol). John Edwards looked small in that stadium,this was the first thing out of Tweety’s yap. Seriously,this is the genius of Matthews?
What’s wrong with America can be answered by what we prioritize.
Teachers make barely enough money to support a family,but pro athletes make millions.
Our “news”talks about how small one man looks in a stadium,but barely mentions his ideas for making a better nation.(I think Edwards scares the crap outta them,personally)
We have people who buy 60K handbags while others go hungry,homeless,without healthcare.
There are barely enough resources to help a fraction of the victims of domestic abuse,but there’s plenty of money for war machines and the development of more.
We spend more money on”defense”than the entire planet combined.
We show our priorities in our choices,what we watch,wear,eat,where we live(when we’re lucky enough to have a choice).
The rest of the world sees that,even if we don’t.
democracynow on the debate:
http://www.democracynow.org/
Nola Sue @ 5
Ah, thanks for that heads up — was just looking at that issue.
Good morning everyone. Are we having good debates or what? Kucinich cracks me up. Marcy and Jane think short men are all like Libby.
I think Kucinich is doing a great job. He’s bringing the discussion to places I doubt it would go without his presence. He may not win the nomination,but there’d damn well better be a Cabinet position with his name on it.
Thank you, Scarecrow, for articulating so beautifully what I’ve been thinking about the campaign since the YearlyKos forum. Even Gravel adds to the dialogue by being the crazy guy - this makes Kucinich shine.
anangryoldbroad @ 23
I wish someone who knows him would talk about what he is like personally. What he’s like to work with etc. I think we know less about him than the others.
anangryoldbroad @ 23
Well, after the FISA debacle, I’m not sure we can spare any Senate Democrats. It’s not a though we have too many.
Good Eliot Spitzer piece on passion and humility in politics. He’s certainly nailed the passion part of it.
good morning! coffee is almost ready…
“Republican clowns” - seems to be a theme that’s developing…
angryoldbroad - Bingo. Kucinich is the moral compass of the entire discussion and that is a good thing. We need to control, craft, hone the entire discussion before the GOP can do their usual “we own the discussion and you worms in the Democratic Party can just react to it.” the only thing they have to sell is fear. Sorry guys, fear does not feed families; fear does not get you healthcare; fear does not build jobs or businesses.
Caw, Caw, Scarecrow! I agree, let’s keep the dialog up among all the candidates. I also agree that any of the Democratic candidates are better than the best of the GOP candidates. But I surely would not want to underestimate the GOPers. For some reason, nation wide we’re still neck and neck with them.
I think we underestimate Kucinich way too much. Someone said it’s because he’s short and funny looking. But that’s not a good reason, especially when he’s consistently right.
What really worries me is those 57 Dinos that voted to give more power to incompetence. These are the same people who in their next breath will say they were fooled, duped. They’ll say, well, they gave them the power to undo the 4th amendment to the constitution, but they didn’t think they’d use it! Which brings me to a serious question or two. Since this new law appears to be totally at odds with the fourth amendment, who has the standing to take this to court? Also, if the law is unconstitutional, doesn’t Congress have to literally repeal the fourth amendment to make this law work? Doesn’t that require something like a 2/3 majority. I only saw this mentioned once, at TPM Cafe. But I haven’t had a chance to view all of the comments at FDL for the last several days. Could anyone steer me to a discussion of whether repeal of the fourth amendment would be required to legalize this change in the FISA law?
By the way, one reason I haven’t had time to view all the comments here is I’ve been too busy distributing my letter to those 57 turncoats. Hopefully everyone that comments here has also sent some lovely lyrical message to those representatives that refuse to do what the will of the people requires. I even sent a special message to Webb…that the truth has finally come out: that he’d rather be a pawn than a player. Too bad, because I thought he had better in him than that!
I LOVE what Gore has been doing since we won in 2000, but I think many of us are projecting all our hopes onto him.
I’m not sure he’s the “messiah” we’re all looking for — and I think he realizes that too. He has said, and I think he’s right, he’s able to do more good now, outside the political arena, than he would inside.
We’re all looking for that strong, charismatic character to lead us out of this quaqmire we’ve been in since Reagan, but I’m afraid we’re all to quick to project the qualities we hope for onto anyone who shows even an inkling of promise.
I think part of Obama’s strategy hinges on this tendency of human nature. I notice with him, more than any other candidates, people ascribing positions to him that he has never actually stated. People seem to just assume what he stands for.
Not that I’m knocking him, nor his supporters. I could get behind him if he wins the nomination. I think it’s just an interesting thing to note.
Scarecrow @ 26
Kucinich is not in the senate.
Agreed. Whatever the effect of the debate on the horse race, it was an outstanding advertisement for the Democratic Party. It showed a huge, lively crowd cheering liberal values, and had the right mix of pathos, passion, and drama. It showed that liberal values are sane, humane, sensible and normative.
You can’t square what was on display last night with the picture GOP propagandists have been painting in the media. More, please.
I have an idea. Get Faux News to hold a Republican Debate with the members of the AFL-CIO asking the questions. You know to provide a “fair and balanced” take on the issues. I wonder how many of the candidates would show. (After all if you can’t face the American Electorate, how you gonna face the terrasists?). Of those who would attend, how many do you think would make it out alive?
eCAHNomics @ 32
No one’s in the Senate. They hid the Constitution and scrambled out of town.
here’s what’s wrong with America;
an administratio that assigns the industry heads themselves t0 write the own law that’s SUPPOSED to protect consumers from that industry
THAT’S what’s wrong with this country and that has to STOP
now it’s more then just this depraved adminsitration, the ONLY way to stop corporations from writing law is to ELIMINATE corporate finance or ANY private finance of campaigns
the next democratic administration has to sponser bills and constitutional amendments that rescind the rediculous notion that money is speech
for if money is speech then the wealthy have more free speech then everyone else
AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT is ANTITHETICAL TO THIS REPUBLIC
we are a government for the PEOPLE and by people, NOT for corporations and by corporations
therefore
we also NEED an amendment that rescinds personhood from corporations, they are NOT people and they CANNOT enjoy the same consitutional protection as people
out
OT, but is FISA ever OT?
Dahlia Lithwick has an interesting way of looking at the vote:
http://www.slate.com/id/2171839?nav=wp
Good morning from L.A. Thanks for this excellent post, Scarecrow. Missed the debate last night- I was flying in from Baton Rouge after attending a funeral for one of the best people I ever knew. 88 yrs. old & using a walker, she housed between 12-15 folks in her home & garage during the Katrina aftermath. A powerful woman I’m missing a lot while writing this.
More from the ““What’s wrong with America, and what would you do to fix it?” Dept.- it’s coming up on 2 yrs. since Katrina drowned NOLA & gutted the Gulf Coast- old friends there still fighting to keep their heads above water. Part 2 of a 5 part series by Charles E. Anderson:
Struggling for Resources: Life in the 9th Ward
Xenos @ 33
eCAHNomics @ 37
Not just the Senate. What about the Blue Dogs in the House like Ben Chandler, who has co-sponsored the Impeach Abu bill yet voted for the FISA excrement. Makes no sense to call for Impeachment yet vote in favor of the “Trust Us” bill from the same untrustworthy individual
eCAHNomics @ 32
that’s my point. A president who comes out of the Senate is one less Senator, except in ties. The veto requirement changes, of course.
How easily we cling to the belief that we have a democracy where our vote counts.
Our government bends to the pressure of the wealthy and their lobbyists.
The elections are essentially rigged by the influence of money and the media and now perhaps by evoting.
We really need a radical takedown and rebuild of the government and the constitution.
The inertia of this nation is to the right. We are at the doorstep of authoritarian fascism… all the pieces are in place… a huge military, a corporate linkage to war, government and media.
I fear that only some sort of catastrophe can impact the inertial slide to fascism.
We now have the wonderful internet, but we don’t seem to have the influence. It’s like screaming into the night.
We ARE living in the Brave New World. It actually happened and we read about it 40 years ago.
sorry for your loss, Marie Roget.
Scarecrow
Thx. I missed your point entirely.
p.s.
have you ever heard someone advise you to aquire debt?
I am taking on as much debt as I can handle right now
why?
because I expect our dollar to fail dramtically some time in the near future…possibly with the next president but probably before
why again?
when china and suadi arabia start to dump the dollars this adminstration borrowed, our economy will get punished
and that may happen sooner then later
OldCoastie @ 42
Thank you. She was a close friend’s mom, like a mom to me too when I lived there. BTW, she raised 7 children on her own.
Quite a woman.
Another observation on the debate. The Ds are framing bipartisanship (date rape) entirely wrong. The keep saying they want to bring the country together. Instead they should be saying that the country is already together, and deserves a leader that the country wants, not one that the country has rejected.
“What’s wrong with America, and what would you do to fix it?”
What I saw of GMA this morning had Diane Sawyer saying she hopes this man’s problem can be fixed. That’s part of what’s wrong, Diane. This is not just one man with a problem, for heaven sake. There are millions of Americans with no medical coverage but you and most of the media do not know about it or do not care because you have yours.
If nothing else does, these debates should make the case against Bush for the undecided, open-minded voter.
Here’s an article on just how clean Edwards’ and Obama’s campaign money is:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....59548.html
While I agree the debate was great and Hillary did well….If you watched Wolfson attack and triangulate afterwards…THIS is what Hillary is really like! She will be BAD for the progressive movement..just my 2 cents
I heartily agree that the field of candidates should remain strong. Since we are locked into a two party system as contrasted by the parliamentary system where splinter parties can have an effect, the presidential primaries serve as a vehicle to express varied viewpoints within the electorate.
The recent FISA vote has prominantly displayed the symbiotic relationship of the Democratic and Republican hierarchies within the National Security State. The basic rights of the citizens can be suspended whenever the chimera of national security rears its head.
The MSM ( GE, Westinghouse, Disney anf Murdoch) is the backbone of the military-industrial complex. Therefore they ultimately will only consider the individual citizen as a manipulative entity of its broadcast powers.
If Bill O’Reilly really believed what he says about DailyKos he wouldn’t be mentioning it at all.
It is critical that all voices and opinions be heard.
I’ll tell you what’s wrong with America.
As discussed during the debate, the Repubs put us in hock to loan sharks and now they’re threatening to sink the US economy.
http://www.rawstory.com/showar.....na107a.xml
The Democrats have to keep pounding this message home.
I believe light can be shed on the question of what is wrong with America by an recent article by Arthur Silbert at http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/ . (sorry I’m not yet familiar with linking) entitled “Once Upon A Time” Blinded by the Story: Liberals and Progressives as Political Creationists. He makes a very compelling argument that the Dems and Repugs are after the same thing and only differ in their message packaging. (my interpretation) His point is that we need to stop seeing Dems and Repugs through the lens of what they say and look at what they do, or don’t do. The story we tell ourselves has to get real and based in fact. The history of the erosion of civil liberties is nothing new as he reviews the last 80 years pointing out the trammeling of the Bill of Rights by Wilson, FDR, and Clinton! At least for this humble grandpa it makes more sense of the caving in than any other explanation I have read or thought of for myself. To me the unspoken message of that poor man last night was, “when is government going to start making the rules of the game advance the quality of life of ordinary people bearable again”.
[Mod Note; Link fixed by mod. You almost had it. All you needed to add was the http:// to the front of the address and wordpress will see it as a link.]
Scarecrow, please repeat this post each day for the rest of 2007.
Marie Roget @ 38
Yes, Katrina speaks volumes about what’s wrong with the country. An sorry for your loss.
Franco @ 49
Agree that watching Wolfson afterwards was a downer. You’d think the campaign would notice that he tends to turn people off . . . but maybe they think that’s okay. He’s there as a deterrent — a message to the Republicans that she has an attack dog too.
Gutless republicans would never answer questions from union people as we saw last night but I’d love to see them try.
ironranger @ 55
Gutless republicans seems to have difficulty answering questions from anyone.
Iran Asks Japan to Pay Yen for Oil, Start Immediately (Update3)
By Megumi Yamanaka
[Mod Note; Edited by Mod. To help keep the FDL servers running smoothly and to avoid any copyright issues, please do not post entire articles — include a link instead. Thank you. ]
Iran Asks Japan to Pay Yen for Oil, Start Immediately (Update3)
A word of advice: Don’t write a post titled What’s Right with America? Don’t think you’d pick up very many comments on that one.
Couldn’t agree more. That’s the point of having Dodd and Kucinich and even Gravel in the race. They can say the unguarded thing that people want to hear that pulls the frontrunners into the direction they need to be. It’s totally strategic to have them in there. I know why Clinton et al don’t want them there, they want to be able to run safely down the “middle” and don’t want to be challenged out of it. But even loopy Joe Biden has had some great moments, what with campaign finance reform and his NRA-defiant moment about the gun nut. They’re keeping the debate fresh and their presence demands more of the frontrunners than just platitudes.
I say keep ‘em.
Scarecrow, I know you’ve been posting for awhile now. It’s a real treat to read your perspective.
Hillary is NOT a progressive. She just isn’t. In a world that wasn’t so skewed,she’d be seen as a moderate conservative at best.
OldCoastie @ 57
When the Dems appear on Fox News your argument may have substance. Until then, move on .
The corporate owned media is weighing in as we would expect. Hacktacular Howie Kurtz in his Media Notes on the WaPo0 web site says:
Then a little later Howie quotes Roger Simon:
“If you were wondering if there is ever going to be a “Sister Souljah” moment in this presidential race, in which a Democrat actually stands up to a major special interest group, I think you can forget it.
So there you have it, the meme of the day is “Dems Pander to Orgnaized Labor.”
More forums, fewer debates. The distinction in format may be narrow, but the important thing is to have the candidates talking to each other as they talk to the audience, because no matter what, they’ll all have roles to play after a nominee is chosen and in the 2009 Congress.
There’s such an obvious contrast in tone, in part because the Democrats have the inherent advantage of being able to speak to both the party and the country at the same time, in the same language. The GOPpers are stuck with trying to out-terrah, out-xenophobe and out-Jebus one another to court the 28-percenters.
Whatever you say about Tweety, you have to give kudos to MSNBC for televising this, a union-sponsored forum, with its rising star as moderator.
And yet, the FISA debacle. I still don’t know whether you can attribute it to gross naivety in management or something more sinister waved over the heads of the weak-kneed by Bush.
As for what’s wrong? Fear. Fear as a means of control, across so many different areas. Americans don’t mind taking risks — the culture of ‘why the fuck not?’ is pretty idiosyncratic — but there’s a difference between risk and fear. And the overhanging fear for so many is that you do the right thing and get punished for it.
The rest of the world has a protean view of America, shaped by the country’s outward face. The Clinton years reminded people outside the US that a clever kid from a modest background can rise to the top. The Bush years remind people that a dumb kid with the right connections can do it.
you guys are such good “marks”, you would fall for ANY con. The same con has been working all my life. The field WILL be “winnowed” soon, the ones speaking the truth will not be heard (kucinich, gavel), and the “front runners will be picked by the media. AND you silly marks will again vote for the lesser of two (maybe three - Clinton, Obama, possibly Edwards) evils and you will think you won.
When will you guys give up on the “two party” system and start working on something meaningfull?
Green Party is my choice.
dakine @ 63
You know,I think it’s pretty obvious what they’re scared of here.
Let’s take that Dems Pander to Organized Labor and turn it into Dems Support American Jobs for American Workers.
After the debate last night I had this vision of a Presidential Debate in a stadium before 100,000 American citizens…with some of the questions coming from the audience. We wouldn’t need the MSM pundits to tell us who won and who lost. Maybe Netroots Nation could sponsor such a debate.
After reading yesterday evening’s thread on the FISA sellout, it occurred to me this morning that the oath of office that our Congress Critters take has really become rather quaint and dated. With thanks to FDLer Susan for her collaboration, I offer the following suggested replacement.
There’s a new thread available.
Scarecrow @ 53
Thank you. Driving around to pick up folks going to the service & seeing where they’re STILL living & the conditions they’re STILL living in…had to swallow a lot of bile & anger tears. These are the hardest of hard working people, still trying to do it on their own.
The memory of that speech GWB gave in front of the cathedral kept getting in the way of any clear thinking on my part, I guess…
Scarecrow,
WHat a great insight. You are correct that the media wants to talk about the horserace/the beauty pagent.
However, I don’t think I can remember a presidential election cycle in my lifetime where there was so much actual debat.
Heretofor “debate” has been a code word for a series of staged gladitorial devents that, yes, winnowed the field.
It was all about who won or who lost, not about what was said. By having so may of these forums, and by using them in such an elevated way, the group of candidates are in fact already exerciseing natioal leadership.
They are the discussion leaders of a great national dialogue about how to fix what the Nixon/ Reagen/ Bush dynasty has broken. This exercise may will bring, not only the Democratic Party, but the Nation to concensus.
What a great way to combat the politics of polarization!
have seen a lot of calls for new “Consttutional COnventions” on the threads lately. However, there is nothing wrong with our Constution as written,it’s just that the WH is ignoring it and Congress refuses to enforce it. The courts IMHO, if youstay out of hte Supreme Court, still seem to be trying to fuffill their proper Consitutional function, especailly the FISA Court, bless them.
These fora, are providing the same kind of national discussion of issues that would occur if a new set of conventions.
Convincing the candidates to do this (along with his plans for election monitoring) may turn out to be Howard Dean’s greatest legacy. His ideas may turn out to be the ones that save our way of life, though he has not implemented them from the WH.
In, I think it’s Huckleberyy Finn, a character when faced with a failed plan that seemed torresult in a dead end says “When the lord shuts a door one place, he open a window someplace else.”
Most of the really effectie people I know, immediately upon being faced with a disappointment, look for the sometimes unexpected opportunity that situation has created. They are always looking for the silver lining.
Perhaps the silver lining in Howard Dean’s failed presidential bid, was through his creation of DFA from the remnants of his campaign, and through his willingness to take on the role of DNC chair and provide some pushback tothe Rahm Emanuel’s of this world, he has managed to save the party, and maybe the republic–though not in the way he set out to do.
Sometimes things happen for a reason.
RickrInSF @ 66
In my neck of the woods,the Greens and GOP run in the same circles,hell some of the Greens are more conservative than the Republicans. Greens aren’t pure,not by a long shot.
This system isn’t going to let a viable third party get a foothold,not the way things are today.
Yeah, Matthew’s *experts* are real gems, aren’t they. Why is it that we can see a progressive event like this debate, focusing on labor issues that have been sorely neglected for so long by the main stream media, and we need to end the event by having it filtered through the Tweety Shit Machine?
Is there some unwritten agreement that the MSM will be given its pound of flesh? It disgusts — so many things do these days and I’m easily disgusted — but I’m more disgusted by the MSM than almost anything else, and I’m NOT looking forward to a political season of re-filtering the filtered information I’m given from them. Thank the cosmos for FDL. And thank you Scarecrow!
I could not agree more, also, about the need to keep the field broad. Keep the full light spectrum intensified for as long as possible. I love seeing the touchy-feely Richards on the one end (with quasi socialistic conservative concepts), being met at the other with Kucinich’s true clarion call to the real liberalism of our founders. And everyone who falls in between has a contribution to make.
The distinction between the Republican candidates and the Democrats is that the republicans must feed on each other in true mean girl fashion in order to advance. If the Democratic collection can manage to show a synergy of ideas without tearing at each other, then perhaps even the most dense in the country will see that as a strength of will and intelligence rather than a weakness. I don’t know if the conservative pack mentality can get there but I think it is important for the Democratic contingency to give them the opportunity.
I see Hillary as the most destructive force to that initiative. Of course she can increase her lead by tearing down her competition. She has the most to gain by being the most Republican in nature. Yet another reason I don’t like her much.
Franco @ 49
Agreed! I’d really much rather see Kucinich win the candidacy; he seems much more authentic!
looseheadprop @ 72
Wow, LHP. I haven’t grok’d that yet and I’m always grasping at the silver lining.
Thanks for your insight.
Hilde with an E @ 76
That was pretty longwinded for so early in the day.
I need more coffee
It’s weird but I have come over to Hillary in the past week. I saw her at YK07 and watched her last night. Of all of the candidates, she seems like the best prepared. I don’t agree with her on everything. Her IWR vote really rankles me even now. But last night, I think I heard her acknowledge for the first time that not scrutinizing intelligence was a mistake and one that we should never do again. It may be the closest we ever get to an admission of a mistake. Ok, we have to move on.
We need to pick a candidate who can hit the ground running in Jan 2009. She’s ready.
looseheadprop @ 72
Mr. Dean has an almost Sisyphean task. Just when I think we’re making headway, we slide back. Two people I supported in the last election, Tim Walz and Amy Klobachar, voted for the recent FISA bill.
I’m beside myself. I not only thought they were good choices, I thought they were the future of the Democratic party. Setbacks like that is what whops the progressive spirit from your soul some mornings. Dag!
portia.vz @ 78
She’s been preparing for twenty five years. Of course she’s prepared; but is she going to do what’s necessary to turn the worm? I don’t think so. She’s a status quo vote for the moderate mindset, at best.
“And when Hillary told the audience near the end that in the next Democratic Administration there will be plenty of work to do and invited people who wanted to help to come to Washington, she got the message right: “Bring your brooms and bring your mops, because we have to clean house.”
That’s a nice sound bite, but how would Clinton clean house, if she’s bought the house with the aid of so much big lobbying money? Will she help out the guy on crutches, by advising him to turn to her pal, Big Pharma?
And will Clinton be willing to return all the powers stolen by the executive branch of the federal government since 2001, if she got the nomination and won?
Balakirev @ 81
I liked the sound bite, but you’re right to ask about who said it. The nice thing about these events is that she has to answer your questions, because Obama and Edwards and Gravel et al are pressing her. I think it’s good to keep her surrounded by these critiques.
Noticed all three morning frivolity shows showed the man ask the question…came across this via Sirota…say it all to me…..
http://blogs.abcnews.com/polit.....es-la.html
johnSwifty @ 80
Hmmm, can we get away from labeling people left, right or moderate? What’s wrong with rational? For instance, if a Republican had a good idea about something (I know, when pigs fly, but stay with me here) would you reject it just because it came from a Republican? Because I wouldn’t. I think we have to acknowledge that not every Democratic idea that was put into practice in the past was wonderful either.
It’s like what Wes Clark said about diplomacy. You start with principles that everyone can agree on and then work out ways to accomplish your goals. That strikes me as the way Hillary operates and I am comfortable with it.
In any case, no Democrat who takes office in Jan 2009 is going to be able to enact progressive initiatives for a looooong time. The GOP goal was to wreck government and they’ve done a damn good job. Putting it back together is going to be tough and painful. *My* goal is to see that the most competent and prepared person gets elected to do the job. In fact, the demolition is so complete, it may be a good time to lay a new foundation. But I want it done rationally, putting ideology aside in favor of thoughtful planning.
But that’s just me. You may have a different take on it.
portia.vz @ 84
Of course we can get away from labeling people on a narrow linear spectrum. You’ll notice I wrote “moderate mindset,” which is not to paint anyone or anything with a broad brush, so much as to draw attention to a general inclination. That the golden mean, the moderate, the middle is determined to be the more “rational,” in your mind, is what interests me. A rose by any other name, my friend — the Aristotelian Golden Mean will always be attractive. But when the foundation is so broke, as you say, my contention is that a truly progressive repair effort must be much more dramatic than a return to rationalizations. It’s going to take a little fire in the belly, outrage and rebellious spirit. Hillary won’t rebel against her PACs, of that I am sure.
anangryoldbroad @ 73