Login Here
Often when training new organizers or talking with activists trying to better understand the theories behind progressive social change, I have a list of recommended readings. Bob Creamer’s new book Listen to Your Mother Stand up Straight! How Progressives Can Win has just been catapulted high on the list.
I cannot recall such a comprehensive offering of solid progressive analysis with as much “how to get it done" detail. Bob utilizes his great storytelling skills to showcase his compelling belief that we have a unique opportunity to force a progressive realignment of our politics.
His work is illuminated by decades of experience fighting for justice, resulting in specific recommendations for advancing a progressive worldview.
While Bob may not be a familiar name here at the Lake, his family and his work have been well represented. His wife, Representative Jan Shakowsky, is a leader of the Get Out of Iraq Caucus and one of the most effective progressives in Congress.
Bob, founder of the Strategic Consulting Group, will never be confused with Mark Penn or other scumbag Democratic consultants. He has been an active participant in virtually every progressive issue including the last 30 attempts to end the war, the fight for immigrant rights, and the new national push for guaranteed health care as a leader in Health Care for America NOW! (HCAN).
Arguably, his most important recent contribution during the Bush nightmare was his leadership in forcing progressives and Democrats to oppose Bush’s efforts to privatize Social Security. While his name was not in the papers for this, there should be no doubt that Bob was central to this fight before virtually anyone else.
I have known Bob for over twenty years, around the same time he hired Rahm Emanuel as a fundraiser (sorry Bob – no one is perfect) and when he met Barack Obama as an organizer in Chicago. As the youngster in the predecessor organization to US Action, I sometimes clashed with some of the other longer serving Directors from other state affiliates, but not Bob. Even during the most difficult times I was always impressed by Bob’s passion for justice and his optimistic belief in the possibility for change. I am very happy that Bob has been able to share these traits with everyone in Listen to Your Mother.
The book starts with his thoughts on the tremendous opportunity these times present, and moves quickly into an analysis of the motivations of the people that we are trying to organize. Section three provides great insight into communication strategies. I have worked with Bob on a near daily basis over the last six months on efforts to end the war and prevent one in Iran in this area and can attest to his abilities here.
The last two parts of the book are about organizing campaigns and the importance of progressive vision in building a more just and democratic society. Bob has done a masterful job in laying out an inspirational manifesto for the left in the United States that is accessible and worthwhile reading for the full range, from the new organizer to the most experienced among us.
As Arianna said, “Stand Up Straight is a one-stop, nuts-and-bolts manual on how to run a winning campaign -- and, in the process, return America to its progressive roots. Filled with learned-in-the-trenches lessons, Creamer's book is a master's class in electoral politics.”
Seldom people that do can teach. We are lucky that Bob is one of those few people. Please give him a warm welcome to the Lake.
Share This 
Spotlight
Bob, welcome to the Lake.
Tom, welcome to the Lake and thank you for Hosting this book salon.
Bob, thanks for witing this book and for being here today.
Thanks for organizing the Salons Bev. It is a great way to help people know about important books by progressive authors like Bob.
Thanks… it’s great to be with you tonight.
And thanks to Tom for his very generous introduction…. I’m sure everyone knows that Tom is one of the most effective progressive organizers in the country…currently leading the Iraq 2008 Campaign, and also as the Campaign Manager for Ned Lemont.
Bob, I love the title of the book, where did you get that?
Welcome Bob and Tom, looking forward to a great discussion.
Welcome, Sir.
Bob and Tom, welcome to FDL this afternoon (why does that sound like a comedy act?)
Bob, a sandbag question: How do we get more Representatives like your wife and fewer like Rahm?
My wife, Jan Schakowsky, was making a speech to the annual Campaign for America’s Future Conference when she used “Listen to Your Mother: Stand Up Straight” as her closing line.
I thought it caught the essense of what progressives need to do to win in America.
Building off this: What can we do to help Jan become US Senator next year?
I think it’s important to remember that if progressive organize — beginning in primaries — to raise the funds and organize the troops — that we can win at every level — and in many swing districts, not just the hard core districts lie her’s.
Our positions are basically popular out there… but we have to make sure that we don’t allow ourselves to be marginalized…. we have to reclaim the notion that progressives values are the mainstream… that WE are the political center.
Will you give your views on the Obama campaign? Are there specific ways you recommend for supporting him/making his efforts pay off? Thanks
In Illinois the Governor appoints to fill the Senate seat if it is vacated because Barack is elected… so it’s an election of one voter.
I think it would be a wonderful thing for lots of progressives to make clear that Jan would be a great Senator… and if she did have the good fortune of being appointed, I think there is little question that she could hold the seat… the folks in Illinois have done a good job over the last few years of making Illinois blue.
I have a question I asked repeatedly of Rep. Wexler when he was here. Since then Emptywheel has put forth a possible answer, Wexler refused to give a direct answer, to same.
The question:
Why did the Democratic caucus in the face of overwhelming public disapproval ram thru Telco ‘immunity’ at the cost of our Constitutional rights?
Emptywheel says that it’s because the Dem caucus was it’s self criminally complicit with Bush’s illegal wiretapping.
Can you shed any light on this?
I know one of the mechanisms being used to do this is Blue America. Unfortunately, it appears that the progressive options for these districts though are undercut by Rahm and Schumer who seem to delight in throwing Republican-lite candidates in to compete with real republicans and the progressive/liberal/Democratic wing of the Democratic party is left out in the cold.
To creat a real progressive realignment in America, a necessary — but not sufficient — condition is to elect a Democratic President — and obviously that means Barack.
I’ve known Barack for many years — Jan is one of the National Co-Chairs of his campaign — and I can tell you that I do believe he believes firmly in progressive values, even though all progressives might not agree with every position he takes.
The most important thing we can to — as progressives — to help win — is to mobilize the excitement and energy of progressives, of young people, Hispanics and African Americans — to change the electorate… to turn out massive numbers.
Further, in the lede in you are said to have participated in a whole lot of efforts to end the occupation of Iraq, it is not a war, could you throw some light on the Dem caucus ‘thinking’ in giving Bush all the money he asks for and never actually making an effort to stop this illegal, immoral action?
My feeling is that the MIC has bought and paid for their votes and that we will never leave that benighted nation unless they throw us out.
Your opinion would be much appreciated.
The second thing we can do it to make sure that when we criticize Obama when and if we disagree, that we do it on the substance and not legitimate the Republican narrative that he’s a flip flopper and has no core values…. that’s how they beat Kerry… and they will try to do it again.
Aloha, Bob and Tom! Two quick questions… 1) Having seen Obama early on, what’s your take on his campaign to date, and, 2) Do you think he is tacking to the ‘center’…?
I think it is up to Obama to repair the trust with serious progressives. I hope he does.
Not many primaries left now… but after the election I think it is imporatant to make clear that selected Democratic encumbants who do not stand by progressive principles could be subject to primary challenges…..Al Wynn certainly learned that less with his defeat by Donna Edwards … and I can tell you that outcome reverberated throughout the Democratic caucus.
Older voters do not want to admit prejudice, but they hesitate, may not, vote for BO. There is time to try to win some of them over (I think). We can’t tell them, “McSame is soooo old.” I hope BO can keep the enthusiasm of younger people, it is a long time until November.
Thank you for both. The Repubs are doing that, those words, and demonizing his every word, opinion, slip. We have to reframe their bile. Thanks for the focus.
Come on Mr. Creamer!
We are not the one’s changing our postition every week or month. Let Obama start making sense and he might be able to win.
Do not put his backtracking on us.
Bob,
Many of us are frustrated by some of Obama’s recent moves. You remain steadfast in your believe that he will have a progressive presidency. Whay do you have such confidence? And, how do we help to make sure it is?
For us to really realign American politics, if we win this fall, we have to deliver on big things: it has to be 1933 again….. something that even people my age (61) have never really experienced in our life times.
But to win on universal health care and the like, we need to run a national mobilization to tell members of Congress that they simply won’t be coming back if they don’t deliver… and Obama needs to lead that crusade… I think he will.
Hi Bob. Welcome to the lake. Good to see you again, Tom. I agree that energizing people is a must to take the White House. Unfortunately, a lot of progressives are feeling deflated about the positions Obama has taken since he’s the apparent nominee. How can we re-energize US? It’s hard to spread enthusiasm when you don’t feel it. Can you help us out with this? Thanks.
To make sure we have to be there to hold him accountable once he wins (as he himself has said).. but we also have to make it possible for him to deliver on things like universal health care, labor law reform, ending the war, etc.
That means that it’s not just up to him, it’s up to us to create the organized groundswell for change that makes it possible for a progressive agenda to pass Congress..
In the near term that means electing as many Democrats to the House and Senate as possible — especially the Senate — so the right of our own party can’t hold us up — and so the R’s don’t have the levers of power to stop us in the Senate.
For myself and I believe many others, Senator Obama’s cave on FISA and the 4th Amendment combined with his rather insulting response to folks on why has not set very well.
I am hopeful that your confidence in him is justified. So far, evidence is lacking in this and in fact points to the opposite.
My $.02 only.
This is a good point. I am so tired of people thinking the center is the sensible stance and people to left and right are the “dangerous” ones. I feel like the dial going farther left is about a matter of “wakefulness” … those who are listening and paying attention.
Hopefully we can really focus the campaign on the major gulf between the McCain-Bush economic and foreign policies — and the Obama economic and foreign policy.
It’s is good for all of us — including the campaign for swing voters — to assure that the lines of contrast are clear and sharp, not murkey.
Of course the campaign has alot of resposibility for this… but so do we all.
Bob, welcome to the Lake. Thanks to you and Tom and Bev for your work.
Bob makes a great case for this in his book.
See, I do not buy the ’shock politics’ doctrine. That is that we need to wait for a complete economic and societal breakdown to get the ‘Demcrat’ Party off it’s well-tailored asses. The big problems we face….
Iraq…
Sustainable Energy…
A ruined educational system courtesy of the ReThugs…
Are all solveable with off the shelf solutions. Solutions sitting there gathering dust while the ‘Democrat’ Party plays primary games and actually puts McSame in a positition to win.
I’d still like to see your answers to my two questions.
I know that his decision of the FISA bill disappointed alot of progressives… Jan voted against in the House.
I know that his views on FISA and civil liberties questions in general are virtually identical to those of most progressives…it is not those views that are in question, but his decision to vote for this compromise.
As President, I think he’ll move to reshape the entire intellegence and law enforcement environment. Jan is on the Intellegence Committee and I’m sure you don’t need her to tell everyone that they REALLY need to be reshaped.
Of course there is only a limited amount you can do in Congress or even through outside groups an the courts to fully limit the threat to freedom posed by some of these attitudes…. you need an Administration that changes them from the inside, because so many of the actions in question, normal people simply never know.
So many friends and relatives listened respectfully about FISA, but treated it like my little patriotic “hobby” and didn’t link it strongly to their own lives enough to take action themselves. Especially when it was so minimized or eclipsed by the MSM. I intend to read the book for intellectual and emotional “refueling”.
Thank you
I completely agree that shouldn’t wait for “complete breakdown” to take the offensive…
Bob, Congressman Wexler was here a few weeks ago and he said that Rahm was responsible for the new majority when we knew very well he was not. It got a pass because it was off topic and rude to correct him in a public forum. But it really rankled because Rahm was able to get away with it after all the hard work of people like Howie Klein and Jane because we’ve been so marginalized by the media. It’s a huge hurdle to surmount. (That’s why Donna Edwards’ win took them by surprise.) In fact Rahm actively worked against Blue America by interfering in primaries…something the DCCC says it doesn’t do.
So after stewing for a while about Wexler’s comments, I wrote him an email explaining the problem and sent it at a time I hoped it would be read.
It doesn’t feel like it was enough. Any advice? Thans.
Great to have you at FDL Bob! What do you think are the best ways to utilize students for this election, the anti-war effort, and the larger progressive movement?
It is my contention that, as important as voter registration, canvassing, and phone banking are, that only leading students to participate in those activities will not be adequately utilizing their creative energy for the larger movement. Students were integral to ending the war in Vietnam, and yet we are virtually ignored on the front of ending the Iraq war today.
It feels as if organizers have simply given up on the notion that we can be influential once again, and this is something I am very actively trying to change.
He would have impressed more and gotten far more out of things if he had taken a stand to reflect his views.
By caving, he does nothing to gain voters who aren’t likely to vote for him anyway and managed to p*ss-off a good portion of folks willing to actively work for him and contribute.
Important I think that we need to really concentrate on building broader support for all of the civil liberties questions and connecting them to everyday people’s lives.
The elements of the right — coupled with many elements of the Intel community and some in the law enforcement community — have a huge power base and are very effective at using the great right wing “demobilizer” fear.
We need more bases of power on our side.
Thank you. That makes perfect sense. We’ve got to keep the pressure on Obama to not “murky” up the waters by listening to the beltway consultants who don’t really know anything about us, if I got that right. *sigh*
I think we all can see the problem here.
Mr. Creamer says, ‘Trust Obama, he will get things moving in the right direction.’
‘We’ are saying, ‘How to you ‘trust’ a guy who backtracks on issue after issue? A man who often uses Republican frames to ‘advance’ his campaign.’
If we are to win the prolonged struggle that lies before us to make America a more progressive nation we cannot do it by following someone who only articulates the memes of the opposition. We must have, must have sir, a political leader who advocates progressive policy using progressive language.
I would have thought that this was an obvious point. But it sure looks as if it’s a point lost on Obama and the his handlers. A group I need hardly remind you sir sadly lacking is electoral success.
Bob, Barry The Privacy Slayer stated he would oppose the FISA amnesty and then flip-flopped and failed to do so. IIRC, he supported the cloture motion.
Barry also speaks of economic opportunity, but his financial/economic advisers come right out of the Univ Of Chicago’s cult and Bob Rubin’s neoliberal fanclub/fluffclub, the Hamilton Project.
He’s a well-spoken, ambitious pol: yet he has never filibustered against Iraq War funding, and he just pulled a major flipflop on FISA….despite all those years as a Con Law lecturer at Univ of Chicago (where he was funded over the seven years it took him to write his autobiography…as a forty-something)
Who should I believe: my own lying eyes, or Barry’s fan club/apologists?
(I am not suggesting you or Tom are among the latter, but I am baffled by the assurances about Barry. If you could help me understand why he is anything other than what I’ve set forth above, I’d be grateful — and relieved!)
A quick note on Rahm and the last election.
On many issues and positions I disagree with Rahm… but he is one of the most effective political organizers around… and his work at the DCCC last cycle had alot to do with our taking back the House.
On the question of being marginalized — we can’t allow ourselves ever to be marginaliezed. We represent the mainstream of American values and we need always to act like it.
Swing voters don’t want to hang out with people who they think are marginal… they want to be part of the pack. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t always take the principled position on issues even if it isn’t popular. In the end that always stands us in good stead. But we need to offensively (not defensively) refuse to conceed that we are somehow the “marginal left” instead of at the center of the political debate…. since our progressive .. left wing values… are at the center of what most people ultimately believe are right.
I have a problem with the idea of “electing as many democrats as possible” when they are people chosen by Rahm and Schumer. Part of the problem we seem to be having is with DINOs, many of which were chosen or backed by Chuck and Rahm.
And don’t get us started on Joe v. Ned—a campaign that many of us spent a lot of time and money on (Hi Tom!)
I have a deep concern that there is no way a progressive direction will be possible given the cast of characters we have to deal with. My congresscritter told me the other day that the House is the least democratic organization he has ever been a part of as the Blue Dogs seem to be running the institution.
So how do we neuter the Blue Dogs?
And as for the dem. Presidential candidate, you seem to have LOTS more confidence in him than most of us do. I hope that you are right, but signs are not pointing in that direction—important signs.
I don’t disagree
Thanks. I also feel more today like this is a serious marathon (which clearly you have been running for a long, committed time, and I thank you for that) rather than intense sprinting when a “hot” issue arises. I want to be a more sustained and committed activist. I see the gravity of this fight. See how that fear you mention is an invitation for greater and greater fascistic-type programs. Surrender of rights for security. Surrendering of rights, as a quiet erosion, or like last week, losing a big chunk at once.
I am grateful for places like FDL as an educational and morale-renewing base camp.
The book will provide both.
Bob, what is the best way to keep the pressure on a politician, after they are elected, such as Obama?. He has changed his position on several issues, going into the election, how do we, as progressives, get his attention after he is in?.
We need ‘Democrats’ like Ted Kennedy and Byrd and Reid even opening their mouths and telling the citizenry what is what.
Democrats act like they’ve got something to be ashamed of.
Well, they do.
Their silence on these issues. Why is there a spot for a guy like Cliff Shecter to go on FOX and tell ‘me they’re lieing to the people.
Could it just be because Nancy Pelosi or ‘The Rabbit’ Rahm Emmanuel don’t have the spine to do it?
I say to you sir that until the Democratic Party gets up on it’s hind legs and starts to fight for our rights we are not going to be supporting them in their Leader$hips efforts to put Barack or others of his ilk in office.
At least I’m not.
Hi RevDeb
The biggest concern I have over FISA is what it says about Obama’s willingness to push for accountability. How can we have the war profiteering and war crimes tribunals that this country so desperately needs to prevent this sort of atrocity from occurring if we have a president who considers cutting off a promising avenue to such hearings as the warrantless wiretapping investigations a “compromise”?
If Dems have more than 60 votes in the Senate it will disempower some D Senators who constantly make the arguement that they have to take moderate postions to attract the Republicans they need to overcome a filibuster.
And if we have a larger Dem majority in the House, it makes it easier for Nancy Pelosi to move good legislation without having to put conservative D’s in a box to vote for it.
Remember that the House and Seante Leadership has a fundamentally progressive bent… people like Pelosi — and her right hand person — George Miller — are heavily determinative at deciding what happens.
Steny and Rahm are both pretty practical guys… if they think they can win they back the Speaker’s initiatives.
There are many Dems that are heavily influeced by big economic special interets, but Steny and Rahm are less concerned with those questions, than they are with the practical politics of winning…. so the more D’s we have the stronger the progressives forces will be.
second the question.
Tom — thanks so much for the great intro to the book. And Robert — thanks very much for writing it. Far too often, I read a whole lot of theory with no substantive clue on how to help make it work. Ideas for action tend to be scanty in far too many corners these days, but your book is chock-a-block full of practical information.
Bless you for it! If there were three things you could get progressives doing today, what would they be? You too, Tom — where should we be going and where should we be putting our efforts between now and November — and beyond?
third.
Would love to see an answer to my 46, as well.
Sorry to be late - what a treat to have both Bob and Tom here today!
Thanks for such good support for developing activists.
One of the reasons why FDL is so important is to make progressives understand that their positions are not marginal… that they are widely shared.
In the 80’s and early 90’s talk radio did that for the Republican right… it gave them confidence and allowed them to refine their arguements… now the blogs drive the MSM and progressive talk radio and MSNBC make a big difference.
Thanks for the answer, but having more Chris Carneys and Leonard Boswells in the House is not a reassuring thought.
When did we have 60 votes? Is this just “new Politics” determined by current Republican strategy? I know it is all polarized like never before, but really, Helms filibustered the MLK holiday for about 2 weeks back in 1969 or so. . .by himself, under different rules than today?
I certainly agree that holding the telecoms civilly liable would have been an important avenue…. the bill, luckily, didn’t provide them immunity from crininal action… hopefully that is another rout for accountability.
I would add one thing on accountability in general though. The major mechanism to hold these guys accountabile is to remove them from power and esablish that the kinds of things that Bush and Cheney did — and McCain would continue are no longer politically possible in the US.
If blogs like FDL and these sort of bloggers are so important, than why is Obama avoiding us like the plague? Even aside from FISA, Obama is engaging in a larger effort to distance himself from the far left—especially the sort of foul mouthed unserious America hating bloggers as those on FDL.
I certainly understand Obama’s need to pacify the pundits regarding him being a “centrist”, but does he really need to do that at the expense of the grassroots base that is so essential to be energized for this sort of movement to work?
Let’s unpack the ‘we’ Mr. Creamer.
‘We’, us folks at FDL, got Ned Lamont to take on ‘The Last Honest Man’.
The ‘We’ of Rahm Emmanuel, Obama and the rest of the DLC undercut and failed to campaign for Ned.
‘We’ worked our asses off to get the ‘We’ of Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer a majority in the House to bring the troops home and get, not ‘demand’, but get accountability from the Bush administration for it’s many alleged crimes.
‘We’, once again led by FDL, took out Al Wynn a corrupt, self-serving pol of no use to anyone but himself and his backer.
My point?
‘We’ here in the Internet have been working hard and succeeding to some extent in delivering to the ‘Democrat’ Party a house majority and some other goodies.
And in return ‘We’ have gotten…
Nancy Pelosi, Hoyer and Emmanuel giving Mr. Decider anything and everything he asks for.
A disfunctional, some say corrupt primary process, resulting in a candidate for the WH who will have to/is struggling to win.
I really think the use of ‘we’ by anyone in the ‘Democrat’ Party establishment is marginally an insult.
When, may I ask, are the ‘we’s’ on you side gonna start playing the game like they want to win?
Hey there, Tom! Welcome, Bob Creamer!
How would you compare your book to Christine Pelosi’s rather generic campaign manual? And do you think the right will learn something about how progressives can win by reading your book? Surely they are going to be trying to figure out how things work on our side after the 2008 tsunami!
Happy to have you both here today!
Booman lays out some numerical history for your reading pleasure.
RevDeb is right. Rahm didn’t want our progressive candidates to win and most of his choices didn’t win. Ours did. (Though a few of them turned to the right when they got to DC…there must be something in the water.) Late in the campaign, Rahm stuck his finger in the wind and jumped in front of the parade to pretend he was leading and everyone except us gave him the credit he claimed but didn’t deserve. We don’t like him very much.
http://downwithtyranny.blogspo.....e-for.html
http://downwithtyranny.blogspo.....-rahm.html
See. That’s what we’re up against. Which is why I asked. The “Rahm saved us” myth is pervasive and insidious. Sorry. Don’t mean to argue, but it is a sore point with me. Thanks.
Guess I’ll narrow the question:
Barry said he’d oppose FISA amnesty, yet acted to cut off debate and then acted to support the amnesty.
How is this not a flip-flop?
Bonus question: Will Barry continue to exhibit this obeisance to corporatist Power?
The key is to also get more Donna Edwards and Rush Holts and so many others who do fantastic work — and to do so in larger and larger numbers as we get better at recruiting and promoting progressive candidates. This is a long-term effort, not a short term one — and the higher numbers we have to work with in terms of better democrats, the more the not so fab ones can be leveraged — more so than most Republicans on certain issues that truly matter to all of us.
It’s a matter of properly working the votes and the margins. And leveraging that impact on elections against leadership to push for more progressive action in both Houses. Tom can speak to this a lot more clearly than I can, frankly, because his efforts on trying to do just that on Iraq votes required a lot of that long-term calculation over the last year or so…
With all due respect, criminal accountability is unlikely due to the Statute of Limitations running out. It also requires the standard of Reasonable Doubt assuming the incoming administration is even willing to attempt it. And that does not go into whether or not the outgoing president doesn’t decide to pardon everyone as he goes out the door.
In an interview this past weekend with Jan Crawford Greenburg of ABC News, Obama seemed to say that there are some late-term abortions that should be prevented - a distinct departure from the ‘all abortions, all the time’ Democratic Party line. He seemed to say that for a woman to receive a late-term abortion, she must show some sort of physical condition necessitating the termination of the pregnancy.
Now, I understand that Planned Parenthood has just endorsed Barack Obama. So what do we make of the statements about late term abortions? So is Planned Parenthood compromising its stance? I know, far better than McCain. But did they have to endorse him after his saying that? Are they trying to distract us from concern as to what he actually said?
I think there are four things we need to do to really create a progressive realignment… we’ve talked today about three so far:
Elect Obama
Take on the big questions once we win… and deliver.
Elect more D’s to the House and Senate so we can succeed in delivering on those big questions.
But the fourth is equally important to making it possible for Obama to be a progressive, transitiaonal president:
We have to change move the fundamental value frame of what is right and wrong in politics… the center of the political debate. To do that we have to talk about our values =– not just policies and programs — all the time…. That’s what over the long haul will make certain that Obama does what needs to be done… and that is up to him, but up to us too.
Folks, let’s try and keep the invective to a minimum with our guests, shall we? Since that is the standard of straight-forward and polite discussion we always have with guests here, that shouldn’t be a problem, I hope.
And please take anything off-topic to the prior thread. Thanks!
I severely disagree that merely taking these people out of power will achieve accountability—that plan failed miserably for Clinton following Iran contra, and we have see many of those complicit in government drug dealing so unaccountable that they can return to presidential administrations.
Furthermore, the right has successfully rewritten Ronald Reagan’s legacy to completely disappear the Iran contra scandal. What is to prevent them from doing the same for torture and the like if there is no real accountability?
Even worse, despite the resignation of Nixon, there was not enough accountability to throw the notion of “if the presidnet does it, that means it’s not illegal” to the dustbin of history. Why are you so confident that this period of history is so different—it took only a half decade for Republicans to take power again after Nixon and less than a decade after Reagan.
Remember that most of the things we are for are GOOD POLITICS…. people want universal health care, they want to do something to eliminate our dependence — not just on foreign oil — but on all oil and the oil companies.
In most cases we have the political high ground… what we have to do is prevent the insider interests from blocking consideration of those positions… once we do… if we can frame the options properly … we can get Boswell etc. most of the time.
We have had many discussions about how criminal liability is a non-starter. Between the statute of limitations (about to run out) and the higher threshold of evidence, the idea of holding them criminally liable for spying on us is a game of smoke and mirrors.
I fear, and I don’t think I’m alone in this, that if the dems decide to let the Bush Crime Family skate after all they have done with nothing more than a “bygones,” there is no incentive shown to the populace in general that justice and the rule of law have any meaning any more.
Couple that with the media’s penchant for making a really big deal over any little thing that dems do while burying the bodies that the rethugs leave us right and left, I have a hard time believing that the dems will be in any position to enact a progressive agenda. I remember too well how the corporate media tied Clinton up in knots for 8 years.
Sorry to be sounding so pessimistic, but I’m not seeing signs of the accountability that the country desperately needs. FISA made that VERY clear.
still trying:
Barry said he’d oppose FISA amnesty, yet acted to cut off debate and then acted to support the amnesty.
How is this not a flip-flop?
Bonus question: Will Barry continue to exhibit this obeisance to corporatist Power?
I don’t think such obsequiesness is his nature… but we have to hold him accountable.
Welcome to the Lake Mr Creamer. I look forward to reading your book. Good organizing yields good results.
You said: “a distinct departure from the ‘all abortions, all the time’ Democratic Party line.”
Actually, I believe the Democratic party line on abortion is “safe, legal and rare.” Meaning economic issues and others which lead to more abortions and other incredibly difficult choices for the poor and underprivileged especially should be tackled instead of simply demonizing women for being forced to make an agonizing choice in the case of a rape or incest, for example.
And yes, Obama’s statement seemed very much at odds with what prior statements on that had been. And I believe some further discussion on that will be forthcoming very shortly, if I’m not mistaken.
I think we all understand that. What I’d like to see is Mr. Creamer demonstrate an understanding that we are not going to swallow the ‘everything is gonna be fine…’ medicine.
So long as people without a moral compass such as Nancy, Steney and Rahm are in charge we will continue to see ‘Sellout’ politics. Yes, I know they are all working hard to ‘win’ for the Democrats….
Thing is what are they ‘winning’?
I’m very disappointed that Mr. Creamer, like Rep Wexler, has seen fit NOT to answer my questions on Iraq and FISA.
To me this means that Emptywheel’s analysis must then be accurate.
Not sure about his comments to ABC… I would tell you that he has been 100% pro-choice as long as I have known him.
But if our gains in the House come in conservative districts, and those members join the Blue Dogs and become Bush Dogs, won’t our Democratic caucus still be held up by its least progressive elements? Sometimes, I’d like to see a GOP win in a conservative district, if only so we don’t have to accommodate some Chris Carney-type lying corporatist within our own party.
If we continue to have corporatists in safe Blue seats (Towns, Hoyer, and many more) and our House team’s growth comes in nearly-Red districts, how will the Democratic House caucus become more progressive? Isn’t the primary challenge our only method of change — both actually and by example?
And Hillary failed to show up for the last effort to remove telco immunity from the bill back in February — a month after she’d promised here on FDL to oppose it. Obama at least managed to show up to vote for that immunity-removing amendment.
That’s why I’m darkly amused by Salon’s Joan Walsh’s efforts to pretend that Hillary’s somehow better than Barack on FISA. As Russ Feingold himself said:
Agreed in full. I particularly agree with your point regarding the media tying Clinton up, and I wonder (and asked previously in this thread) why Obama is so against coordinating with the new media powered left to create a system where a true public discourse can be held.
Furthermore, how are we going to have a transformative style of politics if we do not have a return of the rule of law—even for the rich and powerful? It appears Obama has not put a premium on reestablishing a nation of laws and not men, and regardless of our need for a democrat in the White House, we most desperately need a return to that central dictum of American philosophy.
Apart from ‘Elect Obama’ I am in agreement.
He will never get my vote.
See the comments here on FISA for why.
Sun Tzu put it this way:
‘Better to have your enemy in front of you than allow him, under the guise of friendship, to sip behind and stab you in the back.’
Christy is commenting on invective which I have not seen much of in this thread but….
Let me assure you that the populace is red hot mad about FISA. It increases the traffic to my blog by a factor of 10 and nobody, nobody, is cool with what Obama and assuredly the rest of the ‘Democat’ Party did that dark day.
If you take away anything from here today be assured ‘we’ are coming for those who sold us out. Might take a while but, in my estimation, people have had enough from the current Democratic leader$hip.
Thank you, Christy. Sorry.
Bob, I hope you know that you are here at a critical time for us as we all feel conflicted about what’s happening. I really appreciate your being here at this time. I