I’ve been following Paul Rosenberg’s series on Open Left with interest, wherein he analyzes the different ways Democrats and Republicans govern and engage tactically via Kegan’s Model of Cognitive Development. (Pach always refers to Rosenberg as “the blogosphere’s best commenter” and there’s good reason for that).
Essentially Paul is arguing that Level 3 cognitive development, which “corresponds with the stage of normal adulthood in a traditional society, a stage in which the self’s subject is defined by the roles and relationships of the social surround,” is the stage of development Republicans govern from (needs, preferences), occasionally dipping down into Level 2 (impulses).
Democrats, on the other hand, are capable of dealing with abstract systems when it comes to policy, and correspond to Level 4 — “the modern self, which takes those roles and relationships as objects to be consciously and intentionally acted on.” Which just makes Democrats inherently better at the kind of sophisticated thought necessary to engage in good governance.
However, when it comes to politicking, Rosenberg argues that the positions are reversed:
My argument is that conservative/GOP policies are stuck at level 3–sometimes devolving to level 2–in a level 4 or even level 5 world, while liberal/Democratic political practice (campaigning, legislative maneuvering, making arguments in the media, etc.) is every bit as backwards as conservative/GOP policies are.
And more often than not, when some Democrat does step up their game to question the level 3 assumptions of Versailles (implicitly or explicitly, intentionally or not) they will be shot down–not so much by the Republicans, but by other Democrats (even many in the blogosphere) who will either leave them stranded at second base, or else join with the Republicans in persuading the umpires to call him out, for failing to tag first.
This diary was inspired in part by this exchange in comments yesterday. There is a fundamental disconnect here: progressive souls just can’t seem to understand the point I’m making–you don’t attack your own guy when he’s advancing the argument, even if he does so imperfectly. You take advantage of the gains he’s made and put them on a firmer foundation. Maybe afterwards you take him aside in private. But not in public. That is simply giving aid and comfort to the GOP, which is, of course, the enemy of normal Americans (Katrina, Iraq, SCHIP, etc.).
I’ve always thought Republicans are better at pure politics than Democrats because they operate on a level of crude cunning that gives them a leg up, but I think Rosenberg might be right. For whatever reason, they are able to step back, abstract and manipulate situations and relationships to their advantage in that particular arena in a way that Democrats just do not seem capable of. Democrats seem to suffer from some sort of mental diarrhea in the press, and whatever thought wanders through their head comes out of their mouths, self-justified as some sort of “truth telling” with little thought as to the larger implications.
The Republicans, on the other hand, have managed to wage an incredibly successful PR effort that keeps them in control of the legislative agenda despite minority status in both the House and the Senate and a President at 24% JAR.
From The Hill:
“Let me get this straight: When they were in the minority, it was the majority’s fault when their agenda failed,” said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). “And now that they’re in the majority, it’s the minority’s fault? Seriously?”
Yes. Seriously. Because they play their hands much better than we do. The GOP doesn’t throw their extremists under the bus in order to seem “reasonable” and “discipline its own,” it invites them to the fucking White House and makes everyone show up and pay homage. And it’s not because Laura admires their keen fashion sense, or because what they say just isn’t as “outrageous” as MoveOn or Pete Stark. They know the strategic value of having those people out there to move the goalposts, while they can sweep in behind them and claim the territory they want.
While I may not always agree with the tactics and speech that those on the “far far left” engage in, I’ve never found it necessary (or desirable) to publicly rebuke them. I’m happy they’re out there making me look moderate. Without them, the putative “center” shifts to…the DLC.
Rosenberg concludes:
[M]y entire argument has been about how the Democrats act from a place of being embedded in the level 3 assumptions that the GOP continually manipulates from a level 4 position. This is not at all the same as saying “that a fellow progressive is a righty.” Rather, it is saying that even a fellow progressive (and not just a DLC clone) is going to be shooting themselves in the foot so long as they remain stuck in level 3 thinking, while the GOP runs level 4 rings around them.
We have to get smarter, people. We are already much smarter when it comes to policy. We know this without doubt. But we need to apply that same intelligence at the same level of cognitive development in the realm of political gamesmanship, or we will continue to defeat ourselves over and over and over again.
For some reason, whatever faculty that Democrats access when they comprehend the connection between, say, children’s health care and overall crime statistics eludes them as they continue to play their role in a battle they are being resoundingly beaten at.
Paul is right, it’s time to smarten up.
(photo by sean dreilinger)
Related posts:
- Ceci Connolly Was the “Play” in the Washington Post’s Pay-to-Play Dinner Scheme
- Rahm’s Game Plan: Blackmail Progressives with “Cash For Clunkers”
- Pay to Play: $1.4 Million a Day Buys a Lot of Votes
- Late Night: Ross Douthat and Dana Milbank Star in “The Mewling Game”
- Help Us Put Mike Ross/Blanche Lincoln Ad on Arkansas Razorbacks Game





Spotlight







Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search

zed?
just stumbled in. hi Jane.
Jane!
Gawd. I don’t even want to get started on the DLC. Well… perhaps I do afterall.
“Without them, the putative “center” shifts to…the DLC.”
Many of us realize where (or to who) the roads from the DLC ultimately lead.
Hi Betsy, hi Ann!
Yes. Seriously. Because they play their hands much better than we do. The GOP doesn’t throw their extremists under the bus in order to seem “reasonable” and “discipline its own,” it invites them to the fucking White House and makes everyone show up and pay homage.
That’s the point I was (trying) to make yesterday to scarecrow. He was saying the GOP protects its brand, and I pointed out sure, but only from the heretics who stray to the left (and rationality).
The Democrats also only discipline the left. Bush dogs get a free pass, and as a result, the press feels they also have a free pass to crap on the left, all of the day and all of the night.
I feel almost insulted. I am not a member of the “far far left”. I am a member of the ‘far, far, far left’.
This may seem a gross oversimplification (and may in fact be a gross oversimplification), but I attribute this problem, at least in part, to the fact that far too many democrats and progressives didn’t play team sports growing up. Team sports teach values — sublimation of individual goals to team goals, settling differences in private and presenting a unified front to the opposition, disciplined execution of somebody else’s agenda, not giving up in the face of adversity — that democrats and progressives seem to not get.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 7
Watch out, Joe Kline and Steney Hoyer might try to spank you.
AP – The U.S. military said its forces killed an estimated 49 militants during a dawn raid to capture an Iranian-linked militia chief in Baghdad’s Sadr City enclave, one of the highest tolls for a single operation since President Bush declared an end to active combat in 2003.
burnspbesq @ 8
I wasn’t in team sports as i grew up. I was actually in choir. Band activities, particularly marching band has the same effect. You’re a group going towards the same goal–you just aren’t an athlete. It happens to be sound that is the victory.
This is a good thread, too. As I’ve said on several of the progressive blogs, I sympathized with Starks’s anger and frustration, but I thought that in his hyperbole he had handed the warpimps a stick to beat us with, and made it easy for they, and the MSM, to portray us as wild-eyed Jane Fondas, which I thought wouldn’t help atall.
I may have been wrong. :o)
A while back, Cee posted this on GNB.
http://www.thegroupnewsblog.com:
CNN had a quick-poll on whether or not Stark should apologize, and at that point, 12,028 votes had been counted, and it went:
Yes—7%, or 858 votes.
No—93%, or 11,170
Which, if it’s accurate (and why would CNN shave it TOWARD us? :o) ) is, to put it mildly, a pleasant shock.
I am so happy to have been wrong. :o)
And Pelosi, before ANY poll, should have just said, basically:
“WTF? The guy speaks for himself, just like when Dan Burton called President Clinton a “scumbag”…All of you assholes who helped create this fuckup, and who WON’T help us end it, or at least, end or part in it, DEAL WITH IT.”
Fear of negative perception may play a part in the self-defeat seen in the Democratic response process, also…As the dialog has been framed externally for decades in an antagonistic fashion, using terms that guarantee negation of their best impulses.
burnspbesq @ 8
I always thought that one of the defining characteristics of a progressives was that we like rules, sport, referees, and especially winning. How progressive is a member of the House Progressive Caucus who votes against the caucus?
What Starks said was right and he said it in a way that brought attention to the reality of what George Bush isn’t doing: fixing Iraq. With over 600,000 Iraqis dead and over 2 million who have fled the country, if George isn’t enjoying his own little genocide, then why keep our soldiers there and why continue to talk about his little genocide with a big ole smirk on his face? He’s deeply amused by what he’s done…that’s why!
Nancy Pelosi should have said nothing after Starks made his comment.
A great book: Framing the Debate by Jeffrey Feldman.
Nancy Pelosi needs to read it.
Tanbark @ 12
I think that poll is biased, with only two choices. How about
Yes
No
FUCK NO!
Turkey bombards northern Iraq after ambush
Fears of incursion grow as troops killed and captured
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq…..58,00.html
I know this is an over simplification but
there are those who think it’s all about “Me!”
and then there are those who know it’s all about us.
That’s the dif between today’s Republican Party and the Democrats.
I don’t know how we get to Effective when the other side has no respect for fair play.
Replace Pelosi with Stark.
Just a drive by, but a great post, Jane. I wonder where fear fits into the levels of assumption used in the different levels of cognitive development.
It strikes me that some of the Dems. in leadership positions work from a position of fear–fear that something bad will happen to the Dems. in ‘08, fearful of the consequences of their actions (or inactions).
I think it was Geoge Lakoff who talked about prototypes in linguistics, and the kind of pictures that come to mind when you think of a particular word, and those prototypes color meaning. That is why it is so important, as progressives, that we frame our messages by sharing our prototypes or stories, because if they don’t get the picture they won’t get our meaning.
The issue isn’t whether we should critique those of us who are on the same side, but rather perspective matters. This isn’t just a game of manners here, but staying on point and hammering away at it.
I am disgusted by the past 4 decades of Republican leadership in this country, but when the Dems have gone along to get along, they are equally infuriating. Of course, I’d prefer Hillary Clinton to Rudy Giuliani, but the issues are more important than goddamned personalities or whether or not Rush Limbaugh or Move On coined “betray us.”
Jane is absolutely right that the wingnut mentality owns the discourse, and I wish that even Senator Leahy had had the temerity to respond to Dick Cheney, “y tu mama tambien.”
Our leadership in the Democratic party lacks heart, aka courage.
Unity. Loyalty. Fight back. Plan ahead for payback. I like the taking names idea, instead the usual -everyone has a right to their own opinion bla-bla.
I’m not ready to make nice. Edwards fights for me, with me.
Scores killed in US Iraq raid
Two police sources said the dead included women and children.
Here’s a thought:
Let’s see if any of the candidates want to speak out on this. :o)
The little smiley is because it’s a small hot-button issue, past Stark’s statement, itself.
Will any of the three frontrunners decide to triangulatel, and suck up to the base? :o)
For that matter, after the REPUB candidates see the results of the CNN poll, how many of them will voice THEIR “outrage”? :o) :o) :o)
mary @ 14
Perhaps…But such assumed rubrics put forth metaphorically into the political process are nullified when one’s opponent has consciously decided that the rules do not apply, referees can be neutralized through fear or graft, and all that matters is winning, with ‘good sportsmanship’ deemed fit only for sac-free losers.
Dodd and Edwards are prize winners. Biden gets very honorable mention.
“I’ve always thought Republicans are better at pure politics than Democrats because they operate on a level of crude cunning that gives them a leg up, but I think Rosenberg might be right.”
Actually, I think you and Rosenberg are saying the same thing. You know, I absolutely agree 100% with everything said in this post; and, yet, wonder if it is not, at least in some fashion, perpetuating the very problem it discusses so eloquently. Namely, here we are psychoanalyzing ourselves; engaging in more existential relativism instead of just cracking the discipline whip, toughening up and getting on with the necessary hand to hand combat. On the other hand, my making of this comment constitutes the same thing too; thus making the discussion even more circular. Maybe, as thinking Democrats, we just can’t help ourselves; the problem is not in our tactics, its in our DNA.
darkblack @ 25
I didn’t understand any of that.
Tell us George W. Bush. Are you in church praying for the dead women and children that you are responsible for killing in Iraq this Sunday morning?
Did you read the post yesterday wherein Jane, Scarecrow, and Digby debated this issue? I suggested something similar, but my suggestion included reading all the miserable, disgusting things any Rethug has said on the floor of the House of any Dem over the last decade or so and saying she will ask Pete to apologize as soon as each of those people apologize for what they said. Later, I also thought that she could have simply said that the President should follow Chuck Hagel’s advice if he’s skittish about Pete’s speech, and get a job selling shoes. Else, they should all stop whining. I think the whining needs to be pointed out every time you hear these hissy fits they’ve become so famous for, so that the weakness will be projected on them!
Overall view?
The situation with Iraq, that is, with bushCo wanting “good news”, or no news at all (and largely, the latter) and with the MSM showing a marked propensity to comply with that, neverless has this way of surfacing like a U-boat of a turd, in the chiffon-gongeal punchbowl. :o)
We’re in a spike of news and interest in Iraq. You can almost feel it, and every time it happens, my 2c, I get a bit excited about the prospect of beating on these bastards like they were the proverbial rented mule. :o)
If the Democratic leadership keeps pushing it, they may in a sense, force many people to stay home on election day, or worse, vote Republican.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 26
If Dodd filibusters, I’ll be watching his donations. I hope he puts up a “filibuster here with me” thermometer or bat. If it’s true that Reid will stab him in the back over the hold, and force him to filibuster, then Dodd will become very hot stuff very fast. And Reid will rue the day. I predict.
Old story; As an “indicator”, the hobo may have just picked up a 12,000 vote “cigar”, with plenty of “smoke” left in it. :o)
Ann in AZ @ 30
yep!
Tanbark @ 12
Very interesting poll.
Of course I agree with Stark, but I don’t think that’s the point. Which is why I try to bring up folks I DON’T agree with — the principle still holds.
“We will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon, he said.”
Cheney’s words seemed to only escalate the U.S. rhetoric against Iran over the past several days, including President George W. Bush’s warning that a nuclear Iran could lead to World War III.
This is really rich:
He also said the ultimate goal of the Iranian leadership is to establish itself as the hegemonic force in the Middle East and undermine Iraq as a rival for influence in the Muslim world.
I’m still waiting for Speaker Pelosi to “drain the swamp.”
The Strategy of the Fighter Pilot
Rayne dropped this link in an earlier thread (1/06) and it is still on target wrt our political “conundrum”.
mary @ 29
“Republicans cheat.”
We are the only nation on earth who has ever actually used atomic weapons on an enemy, yet we have the chutzpah to tell the world that we will not allow other, weaker nations to have them. You know, that global deterent works both ways. Without it, I’m sure Iran feels like a sitting duck. And in truth, they are.
Jane:
You’re still giving the Dem “leadership” far too much credit here, naturally assuming they pull this kind of shit out of some bumbling, Keystone Kops-esque lack of co-ordination or discipline, or that they’re just plain incompetent. Wrong. They know what they’re doing.
When the chips are down, they don’t hesitate in the least to turn on their base, and increasingly, they don’t even bother to try disguising that fact. Why should they? They know progressives can either vote for them, or stand aside & let the Rethugs run amok. Not much of a choice; either way, they win and we lose.
mary @ 28
Allow me to simplify, then…When your opponent throws away the rulebook, pick it up and hit them with it as hard as you can, repeatedly.
But this is not what elected Democratic representatives are doing, and so we must educate them to the task.
Jane Hamsher @ 40
Gasp!…Salts…couch…
;>)
Chris Dodd: The Netroots Show the Love
$150,000 in small contributions have poured into Dodd’s campaign in the past 24 hours
In 24hrs…. after Dodd placed the hold…
Mary @22; hang on a sec. Are those quotes from Edwards?
Just askin’, because you didn’t state that.
and because, I would be delighted to see him getting confrontational enough to call the bastards out. :o)
I hope; I DEARLY hope, that John, or someone, understands how hungry people are, and not just progressives, either, to have someone speak the truth about ALL of this bullshit.
Gaza hospital running low on anesthetic
Gaza’s main hospital said Sunday it has run out of anesthetic for surgeries and canceled all but the most critical procedures, due to an Israeli blockade of its borders.
The Shifa hospital had been using emergency reserves of nitrous oxide, or laughing gas, for the past two weeks, and placed an order for fresh supplies, but stocks ran out Sunday morning, hospital spokesman Walid Mahalawi said.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/S…..e/ShowFull
Republicans cheat to win. Democrats use words to win but they now fail to enforce their own rules.
Our Democratic leaders in congress fail to fight hard and loud so that everyone knows and can repeat who we are, what we like and believe and won’t tolerate. They fail our fight and us. The most powerful elected officials in the oldest democracy – and they won’t speak with words that have clarity and power.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 10
Define militant. Could it be spelled c-i-v-i-l-i-a-n?
Great post! I think I know what you mean; this has been an issue for me for years. It was best exemplified in 2004: Here I am, stuck in PA after 20 years of watching NYC politics, and our candidate is running very weak ads.
The week before the election, I finally saw a Kerry ad that seemed strong and “fighting back,” if you know what I mean.
But it was the kind of thing our pols should have been doing from the beginning; and should be doing now, for that matter.
You don’t attack your own side publicly unless it’s an egregious error (rampant graft, e.g.). But you do attack your opponents. Loudly and at every opportunity.
IMHO, that’s why Koch was the last great mayor of NYC. Dinkins came across as weak; Rudy is just a fascist bully; Bloomie is more in the NY spirit, if a bit too effete. Love Spitzer.
‘UK special forces operating in Iran’
British special forces have carried out several operations inside Iran in recent months in an attempt to prevent the Revolutionary Guard’s Al-Quds force from shipping weapons to Iraq, the Sunday Times reported.
Ann in AZ @ 49
I’m a militant.
Sorry; make that “Koch was the last great mayor”; tried to cut “Democratic” and some weird software thing happened.
John D. @ 43
You do have a point, I think they are actually working in their own interest, don’t want to end the war and don’t want to take responsibility for it. Likewise FISA. But they also do a disservice to larger agendas that they could be pursuing were they not perceived as weak and ineffectual when attempt to avoid responsibility for their actions by looking chaotic and hapless.
I actually do think they wanted to pass SCHIP. Had they been more willing to take it to the Republicans, rather than let proxies do it for them (not to mention being in control of their own ranks) they might have had a fighting chance.
As it is, they can’t overturn a Presidential veto and they’re just stuck being an opposition party for the next year. Something they do really, really badly.
Elliott @ 19
We learn to play by their rules, that is, no rules, that is, dirty! Our new motto should be, Just Do It!
Oklahoma kiddo @ 51
Can you wait until the topic changes? It’s rude to try to topic hijack.
Turkish army lost more than it announced, clashes continue – PKK
http://66.111.34.180/look/engl…..rSection=1
Youffraita @ 50
Yeah love Spitzer.
Progressives really are “party within a party,” and Spitzer is on the front lines of that particular battle. We need to do more on him, will try to get to it this week.
John D., i DO think Pelosi, etc., are bumbling, especially, politically, since they are STILL sitting in the deckchairs of the Titanic, while the ship is starting to kick up for the final plunge. :o)
In fact, when I get past my anger, I have this moment of:
“Thass alright; politically speaking, when the bushCo house of cards collapses, we’ll be here to remind the voters that you were inside, eating filet mignon and pissing and moaning about the internet hippies who are angry that they voted for you so you could sell us out.”
Never you worry, John, the reality-chickens know where their roost is. :o)
mary @ 56
I’ve heard that. ;0)
Hasn’t it always been this way? Republicans had their eleventh commandment, not to spek ill of another republican, no matter how looney (unless he’s gay, of course. then, no mercy.) And democrats beat each other up during the primaries. So far this year it hasn’t been bad, but could get worse. Maybe this theory is just over my head (whoooosh!) but I think-and this has been said allover the place by many – we just need more democrats-especially those in leadership positions- to have more balls. So maybe I’m on the same page. because that means having the balls to stand up for Stark and stand with Chris Dodd.
And Jane, my 2c, no problem with putting up the other side of it. The bones SHOULD be gnawed 360 degrees around. :o)
I just can’t believe this is true. Bush and Cheney told us that Iraqi oil was going to pay for the war and occupation. Has someone not been candid with us? “…not stable…”
Iraq’s oil production is not stable and all indications are that it is going to fall in the absence of new investments and overhaul of present producing fields, according to Mohammed al-Zaini.
http://www.azzaman.com/english…..fname=news2007-10-19kurd.htm
We should recognize the ‘game’ enough to know when our side sells out our causes.
There is no longer anything that can be said to defend Pelosi and Reid, and the ,tactics’ they’ve employed.
Forget extremes, can we just get our side to defend the constitution. Please. What’s wrong with that identity? The party that stands up and defends the constitution.
Youffraita @ 50
Thought Koch got to be a bore after a while. He never did it for me.
Ann in AZ @ 54
As satisfying as that may seem, it really does drop one to the level of the cheat to do so, IMO.
Far better to use the rules as a blunt force instrument and have one’s victory remain untainted.
Hope everyone sticks around for the book salon in an hour. Bob Harris’s book is great.
darkblack @ 44
Well, I guess anyone can understand that, and do I ever agree!
Simplify! Simplify! Attack! Attack!! Aaatttaaaack!!!
mary @ 14
i think it depends on what the vote is?
katymine @ 45
Well, that ought to pay for one full page NYT ad.
This should be easy to frame…
ibid.
Maybe we need to take into consideration levels of moral development, not just cognitive development. To me repubs are stuck in a very low level of moral development. They try to get away with anything unless punished and they view punishment as the way to control others. Whereas Dems are at a much higher level, making use of empathy and the encouraging of taking care of others rather than taking advantage of them.
Take a look at moral development. Because that is what underlies policy differences and even campaigning, I think.
darkblack @ 65
I’m with you darkblack.
Beerfart Liberal @ 65
In his third term, things kind of fell apart. But his first two terms were great — IIRC he got the city out of bankruptcy. And he was everywhere. Whenever there was a problem, he was on the scene, reassuring people that he was involved, that he cared about the latest issue affecting them, be it a riot, a big fire — whatever. At one point in the mid-1980s, upscale restaurants were clamoring to get rid of (city-licensed) street food vendors. Koch quashed this by saying “New Yorkers deserve a $2 lunch” and not giving in.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 33
Interesting … if it ends up Hillary vs. Rudy, and both sides’ bases stay home, who does that favor? My initial thought is that it favors Hillary, because the Republican base has consistently out-organized, out-contributed (both $ and manpower), and out-worked the Democratic base in every election since at least 1980.
A-HA!!!!! We’ve stumbled across Hillary’s Grand Plan! ;-)
jane – whether it’s crude cunning or cognitive development. there ought to be things we can do to learn / advance our development… i hope?
because i’m pretty sure i don’t think the way you or paul describe at all… and that irks me. can you suggest some mental exercises i could do to strengthen the old synapses?
The Democrats need to take back the playground. And I do so love to ‘bounce’.
darkblack @ 43
Thanks. One of the reasons I hear Edwards’ message clearly is that he speaks “subject verb object.” Many of us “cognitive challenged” like what they call plain speech, slow speech, and even southern patterns. Linguistically, it breaks down to that, subject verb object, and hold the clauses. Edwards also uses dramatic emphasis on words that announce, Listen! Then he repeats. I could give his stump speech.
Obama speech patterns move through a paragraph of meaning, like Bill Clinton’s did, and I enjoyed that then before my brain was damaged. Now I forget the beginning before I get to the end and turn off. Dodd uses active verbs but washes everything in too many clauses. I think many people need this kind of special clarity of speech, older people, those who have stopped reading and have TV-ad attention spans, people who think governance is too complicated, boring, don’t understand their role in democracy, people who failed history and civics.
Others. Lots of people. So the Democratic leaders come to the microphones and explain what just happened in terms that the above described people can’t hear. They have 15 seconds until the announcer breaks in with the voice over.
When it comes to politics, I’m not a nice guy.
Karl Rove is the playground punk. I just love these kinds of bullies.
John D. @ 43
agreed. absolutely. the last months have proved it. they are not on my side…
but that shouldn’t stop us from being smarter and better than they are. if there’s a better way of thinking about our own strategies/tactics/action… that’s a place to start.
Elliott @ 73
I don’t know where I come down on that. What a quandry. I guess if we just played by their rules, we wouldn’t be who we are anymore.
oh and o/t my paper printed a LTE today that said after his vote on SCHIP, I hope Tom Feeney isn’t my congressman after the next election. Amen! I was happy to see that.
I’d like to have Rove’s ass in the ring. One round only.
I nominate OK Kiddo for Whip. Preferrably Majority, but either way.
Elliott @ 73
Okay, guys, I’ll go along with that, even though I think that’s the way we lost the last two times that was tried. In Florida. In Ohio. Even though they hold the DOJ, the source of all justice for voter suppression and vote fraud.
Just hope we don’t all go down with the ship. Maybe we can pull out just before we hit the drain.
I second the nomination of OKK for Whip.
Oklahoma kiddo @ 82
I.Hate.Boxing.
but I’d like to see that ;)
Oklahoma kiddo @ 83
OKK and turd blossom, one round of Rock’em-Sock’em Robots. You’re on.
Ann in AZ @ 84
maybe it depends on what the rules are?
surely there are ways to fight back that do not require morally objectionable acts?
Ann in AZ @ 67
Now that I’ve simplified, allow me to expound.
;>)
IMO, the deliberate discarding of rule and convention by neoconservative Republicans is because they seek to fundamentally and permanently alter the fabric of American society.
If they fail in this, they will be quite content to destroy whatever underpinnings they can and leave the shambles to others in order to regroup.
They’ve done it before…They will do it again.
What may need to change for those who wish to oppose them is how the American set of ideals is perceived subjectively, and whether this perception is interfering with reality to an unhealthy degree.
That said, I am probably ‘preaching to the choir’, as it were…But the tools exist within the rule of law to do combat.
Beerfart Liberal @ 81
Their rules are the rules of Carroll’s Queen of Hearts – ‘Whatever they say they are’…a combination of calculated cunning, and suspension of reality for themselves and their victims.
To counter that, one could develop and propagate the will to enforce what is. No acceptance of equivocation, retroactive goalpost travel, or slick technicalities.
mary @ 78
Sounds good to me – I find most speeches to be long-winded if not sleep-inducing.
We don’t all have an hour to sit and listen to a soeech, then another hour to read and analyze it (assuming we can find the text anywhere to analyze, and that it’s the same speech that was given).
bmaz @ 28
I agree bmaz, but I think you take it too seriously. There is no reason why in places like FDL we can’t have a debate like this, while at the same time our leaders (like Nancy is supposed to be) “pivot and attack” (thanks, Jane!) in a situation like the Stark comment. You really can have it both ways, I believe.
A big part of that is the narrative. It’s absolutely essential we find a way to get it BACK. They’ve had control of it for as long or longer than i’ve been alive now. We can play by the rules but if the other side has control of how that is presented to the rest of the country? It’s all for naught. We can’t bludgeon them with the rule books if the public hasn’t a bloody clue on what’s happening and why!
We know this, finding a way to let the rest of the country know this is the hard part and probably one of the most important parts of this entire journey. A true marathon. The rest of the world has more than a clue than the ‘average’ american watching their televised circuses.
The beginnings of that change of narrative are here in the blogosphere, now to find ways to get it out to other forms. Yes, that means the MSM. Detest it all you want, but it’s part and parcel of how this modern world works.
bmaz @ 28
Yeah I drive myself crazy with these meta conversations, but sometimes I think we do need to have them in order to crack the whip.
darkblack @ 66
Strongly agree.
There is so much unspoken truth with which to bludgeon the Goppers (and which passes muster with House rules in my example), why rely on rhetorical flourishes and paint targets on our own backs, sacrificing our well-established high ground (the truth)?
We’ve needed speech and rhetoric lessons for, like, forever.
darkblack @ 89
would you give me an example of what you mean by this?
“In Ohio. Even though they hold the DOJ, the source of all justice for voter suppression and vote fraud.”
Gonzales could be prosecuted, McKay says
Got your BusChen DOJ right here…
Jane Hamsher @ 94
Yes, I tend to glaze over with level 2-3-4, also. But really the issue is how to come up with effective methods for our tactically-challenged party.
For some reason, whatever faculty that Democrats access when they comprehend the connection between, say, children’s health care and overall crime statistics eludes them as they continue to play their role in a battle they are being resoundingly beaten at.
The Dems could take control of the situation by simply intensifying their rhetoric. You saw what happened to Stark? Well, that should take place about a dozen times a day, with NO apologies! The Right-wing Noise machine can only function if it has enough time to organize nationwide and focus on one or two issues a week (along with a co-operative Dem who will cry whilst pleading for forgiveness). If they were to be *bombarded* with issues and what they perceive as “outrageous” comments, they’d be worn to a frazzle in a couple of weeks, and so would their audience.
Limbaugh and Malkin and the entire wolf pack would be gasping for air (Cheetos and doughnuts are a poor substitute for a healthy diet, no?) and their hysteria would itself produce comments that would that would end up putting them on the defensive nearly full-time. If the Dems were smart (yeah, I know…), they’d line up an army of “Starks” to hit the press mics, one after another after another. By reinforcing one another and refusing to apologize *for anything*, they’d break the back of the Mighty Wurlizer in a couple of hundred places, making it powerless and humiliatingly impotent.
Set it up guys…..you know what to do.
Paul Rosenberg’s analysis is brilliant — but my take on the issue is slightly different.
Our Team can be very good with Progressive policies, and half decent at Progressive politics. Where they fail utterly is understanding Populism in general, and Progressive Populism in particular.
My goal is to see a Virtual Boot Camp created, to teach the theory and practice of Progressive Populism.
Populists are two fisted fire breathing street fighters, who win the respect of the public for their toughness. When they employ wedge issue politics that divides the chickenshit GOP wusses that sell out working Americans at every turn, they can create a new Progressive coalition in formerly Red States.
One of the best practitioners of this Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer — he outflanked the corporate sellout GOPers by forging an unlikely alliance of enviros and the bait and bullet crowd. Jon Tester is milder on the red meat populism, but had enough to carry the state.
There are many GOP splitting wedge issues we can use, but SCHIP is one of the best. Now, if we can only get the leadership to understand which side they are on, and how to use the battle axe the GOP has handed us.
selise @ 89
Or which rules we’re talking about. I’m all for following the rule of law, the constitution, the geneva conventions, etc.
But the Marquess of Queensberry rules? Not so much.
On a DKos thread, one poster insisted on the importance of the House Rules of Decorum. By his thinking, Stark broke the House Rules and was therefore just as criminal as Bush for breaking the Geneva conventions on torture. It’s insane.
1,634 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND..
Citizen Hamsher and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
“I’ve always thought that Republicans were better at pure politics than Democrats because they operate on a level of crude cunning that gives them a leg up…”
Awe come on, with all due respect,Sister Jane, politics is not nuclear physics, it is simply relationships of power and convincing people that you really believe what you say you believe. Democrats allowed the politics of the common good to be eliminated from acceptable political discourse with the demonization of “socialism” and “communism”. When people can not respond politically to their own economic interests they are left to coalesce around religion, ethnicity, race and fear. Democrats have lost any credibility with common voters with their “triangulating”, equivocating and catering to the interests of the corporate donors instead of their constituents.
All Democrats have to do at this moment is put race and class back into the conversation by asking “are you safer now and better off economically than you were eight years ago?” It’s simple, Democrats don’t hafta explain anythin’ all they hafta do is convince people that they really believe what they say they believe and then act on those beliefs when they have the opportunity. This last week, Senator Dodd’s actions and the public’s reaction to him make my point.
Let’s not make this a scholastic exercise more complicated than CHAOS theory…it’s simple, the Democratic Party is not seen as representing the needs and desires of the common folks and Democrats can’t be believed because their rhetoric and actions contradict one another when they have the power to do something.
KEEP THE FAITH, TELL IT LIKE IT IS AND DON’T TREAT FOLKS LIKE IDIOTS TO BE MANIPULATED!!
well, I have a different take on this.
*I think the Congressional leadership is going through a post traumatic period syndrome sort of that they haven’t shaken yet.
* and by the Republicans pulling this kind of absurdness on the sensibilities of the electorate, stand to engrave their gawdawfulness in the psyche of the American people to the point that they will not be in voted even in positions of dog catcher let alone any involving humans.
aliasofwestgate @ 93
Go for the verbs. We know the Republican lies by heart. They speak simply, colorfully, memorably. I remember Pelosi saying she would “drain the swamp.” Colorful, subject verb object, memorable, simple. My point above was to honor simplicity of speech because it is a powerful vehicle. It is a fighting vehicle, too, especially when true.
Exactly why Stark’s comment was so effective.
ferg @ 100
yes. insane.
i was referring to the rules we impose on ourselves… not the ones our enemies try to impose on us.
I haven’t read a comment on here about this post by Jane, so forgive me that. My reply is to Jane’s take on Paul’s thesis. I’m blessed to have been reading Paul Rosenberg just about every day at Glenn Greenwald’s blog.
With that said: I don’t think, as Jane put forth in her post, that “smarten up” is what is lacking in the Democrats. If the words smart or stupid were to be used as the correct application to what the Democrats have been doing and how they have been responding or not responding to the Republicans, not to mention their constituents, then you’d have to put their level of intelligence at about a -12 on a scale of 1 to 10. They can’t be that f’ing stupid, so, it must be something else besides lack of smarts that drives them to destroy everything they touch, along with destroying everything we hold dear.
Nancy is a failure.
There was an HBO movie some years ago where James Woods played Roy Cohn. I’m working from memory here and so may be incorrect on some of the details….
There is a congressman who is being blackmailed by J. Edgar Hoover on behalf of Cohn. There is going to be a career ending piece on him in Life Magazine calling him a commie, etc.
This congressman tells Cohn to tell Hoover that unless the piece is pulled, he is going to get up everyday during open speech time and describe in detail Hoover’s relationship with Clyde Tolson. The piece never appeared in Life.
My point here is that sometimes when faced with the dirt and the sleaze that these pieces of shit put out without hesitation, you gotta get up and speak the truth.
Where are the representatives who will get up everyday and tell the truth about this administration? No capitulation, no manners, no “please don’t hurt me” bullshit. Just the truth starting with stolen elections, proceeding to war crimes, and every single offense against the American people. Every. Single. Day.
Let the republicans scream. When they do this, when they threaten, when the pundits complain, the democrats just say it over and over again, louder and louder.
But we can’t have that, can we? Because the majority of our democrats are pissy pants little WATB’s, afraid of who is going to hurt them, beholding to their corporate masters.
Let the word go forth to any democratic representative that might be reading this, you can no longer screw your base by going to the right on every single issue. You can be replaced. The pendulum always swings the other way eventually, and when it does, watch out.
smapdi @ 106
we may think so… but maybe she doesn’t? depends on what her goals are.
darkblack @ 90
But, darkblack, you’re not in Congress, and Congress is just about to accept equivocation and retroactive goalpost travel and they will accept slick technicalities at the polls when their voters are turned away.
You get me wrong. I don’t want to break the rules to the point that anyone gets killed, I don’t even advocate hitting below the belt unless I’m hit below the belt first), although the prospect of making them sterile does seem somewhat appealing. I just think we’re in the fight for our lives and for our children’s lives, against an enemy who has no compunctions whatsoever. I just don’t want to let them get the better of us at pretty much any cost that isn’t coldblooded murder. Self defense is not murder. That’s all I’m saying.
Kitt @ 106
I’m not so sure. I recall seeing Nancy call W “a lovely man” (with a big smile on her face). And more recently, she got upset because of all the annoying protesters on her neighbors sidewalk. I think she really believes that things should be “nice”, and is annoyed or upset when they aren’t.
mikeinseattle @ 109
mike – I recall it exactly the same way. Citizen Cohn, IIRC.
I see that Mel Martinez has now announced he will resign effective immediately. Previously, he had said February (just days after my scathing LTE in the Sentinel – I take full credit). Alot of people here were pissed at him treating the position of US Senator as an extra, part-time job. Whatever explanation you may hear from him or the GOP, he felt pressure. Always good to be reminded that it works. But I assume he will be replaced by a total prick. Maybe we shouldn’t havebeen so hard on Mel. I mean, he says he’s leaving now, because there’s really nothing else to accomplish between now and February. Let see what was accomplished? Lose control of House? Check. Lose control of Senate? Check. Drop in fundraising? Check. Total failure of “outreach” to minorities? Check. I think I want Mel back.
attack?
PeterK @ 112
neokneme @ 97
It ain’t over till it’s over, as Yogi would say. Or if that don’t work for ‘ya, It ain’t over till the fat lady sings. If you still don’t understand me, I’m sayin’ I’ll believe it when I see it.
-ck- @ 100
When current Alaska Governor Sarah Palin took on big oil and the corrupt GOP machine up here, she executed the biggest populist coupe in recent GOP history. Every aspect of the monied GOP base was against her but one – the evangelicals and non-aligned fundamentalists. Even with the most powerful fudamentalist preacher in the state, Rev. Jerry Prevo, lukewarm toward her, she won. It was a combination of elements – a good ground game, over two years of organizing at the precinct level, and a clear message supporting a cleanup of rampant corruption in her own party.
I agreee that better training and tighter messages can help progressives beat candidates who are better bankrolled, but the bottom line on all this is to have a very good organization in every precinct.
NorskeFlamethrower @ 102
What he said. This is the truth.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/20/11289/475
h/t Chaoslillith for this collection of Edwards quotations.
I want Dem leaders to use fighting words like these:
Loyalty to our brand, Democratic Party; good party slogan;colorful and memorable language [auction, parlor game]; short punchy sentences; a call to action; repeats explanation of the problem.
That American Chap @ 99
Yay! This is a truly worthwhile suggestion. Darkblack, this is what I’m advocating, precisely!
So, what does it take to get the Demos to understand the KISS principle in their speeches, their press conferences, and their (still rare) TV appearances?
(If you have to ask, you haven’t been around the correct places.)
Its time to jerk the reins out of the hands of the clintonistas/congressional leadershit. They have been trying to choreograph an inevitable train wreck for the Empress-in-waiting’s coronation. This confrontation must happen, now or later, but it must happen. Stark has given them a golden opportunity here. If ever there was a moment to unify behind the TRUTH, this is it. Its an ugly truth. It is what it is.
Now, Congress needs to capitalize on this spillage of the the beans and line up squarely behind the truth Stark has put out there. Their poll numbers could look much like Cee’s poll she posted at gnb. Hubris Sonic has an excellent post last night where its posted.
NO apology. Pelosi declared “we are the leader”ers in a horrifying article last week. Errrr don’t turn around Nancy. I don’t know who the hell you’re the leaderer OF….. but is sure as hell isn’t 70% of this country.
There’s not much analysis necessary here. Speaking the unvarnished truth should be supported and encourage others to do the same. It should not allowed to devolve into some more insane hair splitting mental masterbatory bullshit. And, I disagree with anyone in Congress who does not see that this has to happen. They HAVE the power to do it. Take your power back Congress! Just.Take.It.
FYI, Book salon upstairs
Beerfart Liberal @ 114
Only Feeney is worse than Martinez is worse than Mica. Makes no difference. At least we won’t have to look at Mel’s big stupid bulldog face (as much) or hear his version of that tired old republican lie - Poor Hispanic Picks Himself Up By His Own Bootstraps and Makes Good (with no help from others).
ES – you mean that chorus of ‘National Brotherhood Week’ they have going on? Oops, someone just brought in the ‘People’s Front of Judea’. The ‘Judean People’s Front’ should be arriving shortly, along with the free-for-all.
Yes, it’s a serious book salon, but the salon isn’t completely serious.
Ann in AZ @ 117
Agreed. I’ll share some schadenfreude when AbuG is in the pokey… not before!
selise @ 94
Not as an criticism, but a subjective observation I have noted that the mass of Americans (like many other countries) are inoculated with a sense of cultural superiority from a young age, through schools, media, familial reinforcement, etc.
This implied state of grace is based on many values…Military and social history, financial and artistic achievement, and other more mythological standards and has a similar function (though obviously not identical) to communist indoctrination of the young in the Soviet governance model.
Some, through education or aversive experience, throw off this early molding and develop a more balanced perspective, but many do not and are content to maintain the fiction in an unquestioning manner.
I do not wish to imply by this that I am anti-American, but a good mirror should reflect all light, flattering and otherwise.
Ann in AZ @ 111
D’accord, Ann.
I’m late to this discussion, but my theory is (I’m not scolding my fellow libs in public, right? this is in private): The reason the Democrats are perceived as weak and spineless is because:
They’re weak and spineless.
hackworth @ 125
True. I’m sick of hearing about poor Mel. Mel was “too affable” to head the RNC and all this other bullshit. There is no way a sitting senator can also be the head of the RNC (or DNC) at the same time. it just says “Fuck you, constituents.” Poor Mel, my ass.
October 21st, 2007 at 1:51 pm
selise at #106 says:
Have you noticed that we’ve developed the habit of calling the Rethugs “enemies” as opposed to “adversaries” or “opposition.” I do it too, all the time, but maybe we should assume a newer, gentler attitude? OTOH, I think it’s a function of how they behave. Can’t turn your back on them.
Kitt @ 107
I think Digby’s right; they’re suffering from battered wife syndrome. Go read yesterday’s post wherein Jane, Scarecrow and Digby debated the issue to see if you agree. Digby lays it all out for you.
Jane (and Scarecrow :) – thanks for making a space here to discuss this.
FWIW, in the quoted analysis from Paul, I don’t see any discussion of the biology of human decisions.
We are hard-wired to assess the world emotionally – the cognitive assessment happens after the emotional decision is made.
[Yep, the wonders of functional MRI scanning. This is why BigAd now runs their campaigns through fMRI scanners - they get to tweak their message to make the neurons jump - so we keep buying useless crap.]
Going back at least to Nixon and his ad men, the Rethugs have effectively used powerful visceral messaging – and they captured the “limbic vote”. (”Limbic” here connotes our brains’ emotional wiring).
The limbic messages swamp the factual wonky arguments my brilliant progressive friends trot out.
To put it another way, unless progressives adopt limbic messaging, they’ll keep losing to the Rethugs and the Wurlitzer.
That’s why move-on’s “Betryaus” ad and Pete Stark’s nailing Bush for sadism so enraged the Wurlitzer: both are highly effective limbic attacks.
The same attacks Newtie, the Rethugs, and the Wurlizter used to destroy the very “comity” they now piously mourn.
The same comity Grandma Nancy venerates over political victory and progressive goals.
But hey – venerating a dead social norm among a sub-group of professional pols is far more important than kids’ insurance or stopping the rivers of blood in Iraq.
When I speak on pesticides and health effects to attain political goals, I know I’ve won when – hearig about infretility and testicular abnormalities pesticides cause in developing kids – the adult males in the room unconsciously cross their legs.
Now that’s empathy – and they’re not even aware.
When I was on the board of PSR-LA our ED asked me to speak to the MWD about perchlorate – a nasty little molecule from rocket fuel and explosives that permeates the Las Vegas water supply …and flows into the Colorado River, one of the MWD’s three giant straws for So Cal.
Oh – what’s the MWD? They’re the most powerful group in So Cal – they decide where we live and where we can’t live. They are the Metropolitan Water District – The Lords of the Tap.
The science and biology were rather simple, and also rather boring – perchlorate in nursing moms interferes with uptake of iodine hence causing abnormal infant brain development.
We were there to give the MWD a heads’ up that PSR-LA was actively considering warning pregnant moms not to drink So Cal tap water from the MWD.
Boring science, adversarial positions – what’s a doc to do?
Use emotive terms to accurately convey complex concepts.
WIth the MWD, the emotive term was “cretinism” – the scientific term (now outmoded) for the infant brain damage seen with iodine deficency.
“Cretin” grabs attention; “abnormal infant brain development” gets stifled yawns…too much jargon.
The MWD staff and Board members who came up to ask questions about their families’ health and safety proved how the accurate emotive term had grabbed their limbic systems.
I don’t see Paul’s assessment taking the power of limbic speech into his formulation.
On this topic The American Chap and -ck- speak for me…and (far better than I ever could) so does Glenn Greenwald. Today he wrote:
The Dems could drive the Thugs insane (always a good political tactic) simply by mimicking the campaign promises of Bush (in 1999-2000). They should talk about bringing honor and dignity back to the White House. They should speak of a humble foreign policy devoid of nation building. They should bring up the notion of “removing command and control” from Washington DC…. Talk of how important it is for a President to be credible with Congress and credible with foreign nations. Emphasize that they seek “limited government” and stress how the next Democratic administration will have the “highest ethical standards” (and repeat the bit about bringing “honor and integrity back to the White House”).
It’s child’s play to show what a failure this administration has been and it drives them and their minions in the press crazy when these failures are pointed out. The American people need to be reminded that all of Bush’s campaign promises were nothing but lies, lies intended only to get him in power and then predestined to be abandoned. The GOP will try to say that “9/11 changed everything” but it’s easy to prove that most of these promises were nixed well before then.
Every-time the Dems speak of the Bush administration, they should use the term “the most criminal administration in the history of this democracy” and they should promise a fulsome criminal investigation and prosecution of every one the examples of crime and corruption that this administration has participated in (also, every offense against the Constitution, including every example where the administration claimed that it had been given dictatorial war powers by Congress….when it hadn’t).
The Dems could (and should) cut these self-imagined Napoleons into ribbons prior to the next election and should be organized enough to hit the ground running (when the President has a “D” next to her name) to instantly move Bush-Cheney off of the viewing stand on Inauguration Day to an FBI paddy wagon, in leg-irons, so that they can be immediately transported to a Super-Max prison to await their trials. They’ve taken so much from the American people that payback will be long and (for them) agonizing.
Great post Jane and I know, EPU’d but I didn’t want to OT the above.
The point that’s driving me crazy about the Pete Stark thing is that there’s a better example of Bush showing his sadistic and callous side. HE TOLD A BIOGRAPHER IN 1999 he wanted to invade Iraq, be seen as a “war president” for political reasons and use his war president popularity to get ihs domestic agenda passed.
In short, he wanted american soldiers to die so he could have more political power. That’s almost exactly what Stark said: for his jollies.
The following is from the first site of the following google search:
Two years before 9/11, candidate Bush was already talking privately about attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer
Houston: Two years before the September 11 attacks, presidential candidate George W. Bush was already talking privately about the political benefits of attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer, who held many conversations with then-Texas Governor Bush in preparation for a planned autobiography.
“He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said to me: ‘One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He said, ‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.”
Herskowitz said that Bush expressed frustration at a lifetime as an underachiever in the shadow of an accomplished father. In aggressive military action, he saw the opportunity to emerge from his father’s shadow. The moment, Herskowitz said, came in the wake of the September 11 attacks. “Suddenly, he’s at 91 percent in the polls, and he’d barely crawled out of the bunker.”
That President Bush and his advisers had Iraq on their minds long before weapons inspectors had finished their work – and long before alleged Iraqi ties with terrorists became a central rationale for war – has been raised elsewhere, including in a book based on recollections of former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill. However, Herskowitz was in a unique position to hear Bush’s unguarded and unfiltered views on Iraq, war and other matters – well before he became president.
http://www.google.com/search?c…..amp;q=bush told biographer he wanted to be a war president&btnG=Google Search
Jane Hamsher @ 94
Oh, I agree completely. Probably didn’t convey it very well, but my point is that I think the analytical breakdown and analysis of things is what makes us who we are. Critical thought is an inherent element of the progressive ethos. However, a greater part of the progressive critical thought process has to be allocated to actual battle tactics and methodology for implementing our policies and ideals of government. My personal first suggestion in this regard is we have to install some stronger and better leadership, and fast. I never thought much of Harry Reid; he has been about exactly what I expected. Pelosi I had very high hopes for and, although there are a few shining successes, overall not so good and going downhill fast with the inexplicable dereliction of duty on the FISA bills, both the Protect America Act (PAA) in August, and the Screw America Act (SAA) now being pushed. With leaders like Reid, Pelosi and Rockefeller, we don’t really need enemies; they are us.
That American Chap @ 134
Excellent post. All of it. Not just what I kept in. Take note at TPM. Alberto Gonzalez is in big trouble. That’s one hell of a good start.
Tanbark @ 12
My reaction to Pelosi jumping on Stark’s comments (and Harry Reid overriding Chris Dodd’s hold on FISA) is that neither Pelosi nor Reid can tell the difference between speaking truth to power and partisan bad-mouthing. But guess what? The voters can. And Tanbark’s CNN poll numbers support that.
That American Chap @ 99
Comment of the week, IMO.
darkblack @ 128
agreed.
any suggestions on how to approach this task – our defenses against hearing this are pretty strong… and usually involve anger and rejection.
I guess this thread is still open. Just called Nancy’s office and left a phone message complaining about her giving the rethugs ammunition by publicly censoring Peter Stark for his comment. I said that as a lifelong dem, I was outraged by this behavior, and asked her to do something to correct it. Incidentally, the voice mailbox at her DC number is full, but I was able to leave a message at her SF number: (415) 556-4862. Go for it!
jane hampsher
this “level” stuff is new to me and a bit dizzying to follow.
were i asked to explain republican political success i would pin a lot of it on the following characteristics, which republicans, as a group, display in greater amount than democrats:
- intense competitiveness
- power as the goal and the desired end
- unusual discipline and communality
- lack of fastidiousness (to say the least) about matters of factual honesty, intellectual honesty, and political “fair play”.
- lack of concern for political tradition
- capacity and inclination to avoid getting bogged down in logical or factual inconsistencies.
- an enormous advantage in the american media’s reporting of republican policies and conduct.
- access over long periods of time to very large amounts of inherited corporate income for planning, execution, and advertising.
some of these may fit the keagan-via-rosenberg model, if so fine. but fit or not, i think one can do a lot of explaining with them.
i would also point out that until some years pass, we will really not know whether the “republican” successes since 1980 were the result of speculations such as this
or simply of demographic, economic, and cultural shifts, e.g., paul krugman’s thesis that most of the right-wing republican party’s success is based simply on the fact that southern white democrats switched to the republican party beginning in the 1960’s.
be that as it may, in the shorter run, it is beginning to look as if the republican successes of the last 25 years were a castle built on sand – awaiting only sufficient republican excess of ineffective governing behavior to bring about the party’s fall from power.
if this is the case, i would look for a new republican party to form following a disastrous republican defeat. a party which will be more in the mold of the existing democratic party (and american political tradition).
Who said it yesterday?
Compare and contrast Delay and Pelosi.
Why did he have so much and she so little?
Nancy Pelosi came out against some of Howard Dean’s remarks also during his run. Even if she disagreed with him why would she give the media that amo. I was so mad I wrote her a letter about it. She’s a little too polite and goody-whatever. I’ve given up the letters. It’s hopeless.
Paul is right, it’s time to smarten up.
just the opposite is needed.
** the electorate is substantially stoopid.
** republicans appeal to the lizard brain.
** smart people that believe in the feudal system as the highest form of social order (with them of course at the pinnacle) are going to vote republican no matter what.
** smart people that can conceive of caring an inkling about humanity, and not reserve all their intellect only for themselves are going to vote democrat no matter what.
** its the stoopid, easily manipulated masses that determine who has the power – that’s where the republicans play: the religious fundis, the violentarians, the tree-stumpers that can’t even figure out where their personal interests lie. Democrats don’t communicate to this group in a manner they can relate to. Instead of getting all weepy, if Pelosi had seconded Pete Stark’s comments she would have been (to the stoopid masses) demonstrating fire, loyality, sass AND the feelings of most Americans. Instead she looks (to republicans AND democrats) like just another dirty democrat floor mop republicans use to wipe down the outhouse.
Democrats need to dumb it down and fight fire with fire.
.
Tanbark @ 12
Paul is one of the very best thinkers we’ve got right now. And I agree with 99% of what he says here as you’ll see if you check the comments of this post and others.
I do want to point out that the meme or perspective on the Democrats has finally turned an important corner. Jane, you made it safe to say when you posted on Verizon’s ‘employee’ contributions to Rockefeller.
The meme has transformed from ’spineless’ Dems to the more factual and actionable one of …
‘Corrupt’ Dems. With Billions at stake in suits attacking the TELCOs for their illegal wiretapping of Americans prior to 9/11 they’ve tipped their hand with Reid, Rockefeller and others.
Shorter form: Democrat ‘leadership’ in the House and Senate are attempting to grant immunity to the TELCOs not because they are scared of Bush and the ReThugs but because they are or have been promised to be very, very well paid for this service.
This could be a fatal error on a par with the meatpacking industry’s attempt to negate Upton Sinclair’s revelations in The Jungle’ which led to such widespread citizen outrage that Federal Food and Drug regulation, a progressive goal at the time, was instituted almost immediately.
I cannot but ask all who have the ability to consider the reality of this meme and that if they agree with it to…
Spread it.
PeterK @ 141
Thank you Peter. I have left a message… NO apology.
I know in her interview last week she said we were wasting our time going against them since they are the leaders and we are just advocates. She’s wrong. Very wrong with that perspective.
I hope everyone calls her and demands some backbone for the TRUTH here!
Nancy may have forgotten:
“Please,” Bush whimpers, his lips pursed in mock desperation, “don’t kill me.”
BRAIN DIFFERENCES ARE NON-PARTISAN.
It is offensive to people who actually have neurological differences when these kinds of comparisons are made.
Do not try to say that Republican-ism is a disorder, whereas Democratic-ism is not. Do not imply it. Do not hint at it. Do not breathe a single syllable that starts down that road. Do not do it in the ‘just sayin…’ mode, do not do it in the ‘ha ha, Republicans sure are stupid, har har!’ mode. Do not do it in the ‘we only want to help them’ mode. Do not do it in the ‘we can control them because they are neurologically different’ mode.
Do not do this. You will undo everything you hope to achieve.
It’s like when right-wingers yammer about how Democrats are all faggoty girly-men. It’s exactly the same thing, but now you’re doing it, because, well, it’s all scientific and shit. Meanwhile, gay people suffer under the right-wing rhetoric, and people who actually *have* neurological differences suffer under yours.
And speaking as a representative of both of those groups: Do not do this. Stop now.
Do not create scapegoats. Do not turn politics into a debate over who has the healthiest or most normal brain.
I shouldn’t have to say any of this, but goddamn! Is this where progressivism has brought us? Does liberalism in the US now rest on who has the best scientific research about the ailments of conservatives?
WAKE UP, PEOPLE. If you’re still people, that is.
OT. Where is Plame and Couric. Has it been preempted for news of the CA fires, which is what my local CBS is showing. I never watch the show, since I get my news from you guys.
Thanks for reminding me BSRH.
Just in case:
60 minutes tonight
Today Show and Larry King tomorrow
Next Tues (30th) Daily Show
Enoch Root @ 149
Saying it does not make it true. You are off base here and not grasping what is a very large and complex subject which has not, admittedly, been discussed in depth here.
Read: The Authoritarians and get informed.
Even if Stark hands them a stick to beat him with, there’s no obligation for the Dems to join in the beating! Why can’t your “team” get that?
Do they never, not even in the dark hours, look at the Repugs and admire their awesome message discipline? Jeez, the rightists in the UK would just *love* some of that.
That American Chap
If they were to be *bombarded* with issues and what they perceive as “outrageous” comments, they’d be worn to a frazzle in a couple of weeks, and so would their audience.
I like this idea. I used to ask people to prove to me that Malkin wasn’t really a member of Abu Sayyaf who had infiltrated the GOP to destroy them. :D
Slam back and hard!
burnspbesq @ 8
Like this thinking, each player hitting their hardest advances the group toward the goal.
If you haven’t read this piece from 2004, it’s excellent:
It’s Time to Stop Being Hit…a letter from Michael Moore
I’ve done some research for myself into aggressive behavior. I think the key thing to remember is the unethical tactics used by the right can be beaten (without stooping to their level and emulating their aggressive behavior) through ASSERTIVE behavior. Assertive behavior is not passive. It’s a mentally healthy way to take them on without compromising our integrity and principles.
The topic of covert aggression (manipulation tactics) is covered in depth in the book “In Sheep’s Clothing: Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People” by Dr. George K. Simon, available on Amazon. Written for the layperson, he also goes over what assertive behavior means and how to handle covert-aggressives in a healthy way.
- Tom
Having been a lefty from way. way back when, my feeling towards those who go “too far” to the left is “Fuh Gawd’s sake people!! USE US!!! Let us be your point people! Let us be the ones to draw enemy fire! We’ll take all of the Republican slings and arrows!”
All we ask is that you don’t repudiate us. When the right-wing guys complain to you about us, make like Theodore Roosevelt when talking about his daughter Alice (He said something in the nature of:) “Gentlemen, I can run the government, I can control Alice, I can’t do both.”
To the regular, more-conservative Democrats: Let us help you!!!