One of my blogmates over at The Next Hurrah said of the nomination of Harriet Miers: “There is no need for the Dems to be deferential here.”
If the party had banners like samurai cavalry, this is the slogan that ought to be emblazoned on every one of them.
Instead, based on high Democrats’ comments so far, it seems the leadership is already furling its flags, breaking its swords and hobbling the horses before the battle has been engaged. Pathetic.
Early on, I was one of those who argued in favor of filibustering John Roberts, even though I knew it was unlikely to happen. After Rehnquist died, I was still down with the filibuster, but it was obviously not going to happen, and I came to accept the tactical argument that, paradoxically, having many Democrats vote in favor of Roberts would actually strengthen their hand when the confirmation hearings for center-rightist Sandra Day O’Connor’s replacement took place. They could legitimately argue that Roberts was, at worst, another Rehnquist. Voting for him, especially given the inevitability of his ascent, would obliterate GOP talking points about Democratic “obstructionism,” and give them leverage over the Next Nominee.
And now, from Markos and a host of others, I’m learning that Miers’s nomination is actually proof that the tactic has worked, that Bush has been forced to avoid offering up a red-meat nominee acceptable to the rightwingholes, that we actually have a victory on our hands. After all, it’s clear from listening to the screaming of Right www.Land and other reactionaries that they don’t like her. Calloo, Callay. Oh frabjous joy. The rightwing in high dudgeon is so satisfying. Score one for our side.
After all, if Bush’s base deserts him over this nominee, maybe it will take his poll numbers down another 5 points, or even 10. And wouldn’t that be delightful?
Sheesh. Are we so desperate that even the most Pyrhhic victory can raise our spirits?
Personally, I love seeing Bush’s poll numbers in the Dumpster. Given the number of people who have been killed in Iraq, the number let die in New Orleans, the amount of money transferred to the rich and corrupt, the amount of treason committed by this Administration, it is a little bit encouraging to see that a majority of Americans don’t think the guy is doing such a good job. A little late to learn this, but finally is better than never, I guess.
But unless Bush resigns under pressure, or gets impeached and convicted – possible, but unlikely – we’re stuck with him for another three years. And he could very well replace yet another Supreme Court justice, or even two, in those three years. Will the Dems roll over and play dead for those nominees as well? Oh no, it’s argued. By then the Democrats will control the House and the Senate and we’ll be able to say no to anything and everything.
Good grief. And people used to call me a Pollyanna.
Philosophically, I’ve been a far-left social democrat for four decades; pragmatically, just like my radical grandpa urged me, I’ve been a diehard Democrat. For this I’ve taken no end of shit. But I have not wavered.
I’ve argued with fellow radicals who have said there is no difference between the parties and apathetics who have asked what the party ever did for them. I’ve supported compromises, and tactical maneuvering and slick strategy with the thought that these would keep this or that outcome from being worse than it could be. I’ve bit my tongue and backed Democratic candidates who gave me ulcers because the alternative seemed so much worse.
I’ve suffered deep gouges in my principles to further the cliché that politics is the art of the possible. I’ve worked for radical policy change outside the electoral process and worked to elect the most liberal/left primary candidates. Yet, when the crunch came, I closed ranks and pressed reluctant others to do the same. For 40+ years, I’ve gone along with the politics of half a glass (or a quarter-glass) in hopes that some day it might be close to full.
But, frankly, if the Dems do what the leadership seems poised to do – let this nomination sail through without a screaming fight – I’m done with the party.
Not that I’ll never vote Democratic again. There are Democrats who I still count on my side, whose principles align with mine, and whose willingness to speak up when so many are silent will make me cast my ballot for them. But walk precincts, contribute money, argue with fence-straddlers? I’ll be using that energy elsewhere.
I know the argument. Many say the Democrats can’t win this battle. Even if Meirs gets filibustered, they say, Bush will just appoint someone else equally as unqualified, equally a crony, and maybe ideologically worse than she might be. Better to retreat now and fight another day.
And when, pray tell, might that day come?
I am one of those who favored rolling over on Roberts. You must win the White House before you can nominate justices. Obstructing their constitutional right to appoint justices unless there is some compelling reason not to (Remember Simba Wood)will just set a nasty precedent when it becomes our turn again.
And if you leave the party now, at its worst hour since the 19th century, it will be that much harder for our turn to come again soon. And you will be looking at yourself funny in the mirror some day.
Buck up sir!
set a nasty precedent when it becomes our turn again.
Open your eyes… do younreally see the Dems coming back into power in the next 100 years. Rove stated that he wanted to make the Republican majority PERMANENT and the Democratic Party is obliging his wishes.
Oh the gnashing of teeth and wailing of tears!
I repeat, buck up sir!
What did dad tell me over and over about a winner never quits? And vice versa?
Surely, you are right. Of course my eyes are closed and I am too young and immature to possess your all knowing sense of doom and gloom. Its so pervasive now, oddly when so many clouds are lifting
How about 8 years? 2016 at the latest. You read it here first.
I’ll bet you a Christmas grog, payable on DEC 25 2016.
If we havent all slit our wrists by then.
but many here aren’t ready to hear it, or have heard it too many times. Meteor Blades has been at this too long, and his sense of doom and gloom is extremely well-earned.
So, I hope your advice is taken by everyone who reads it, but don’t take it personally if it is not.
Oh I am sure it will not be taken seriously. I am used to it. Someday that will change. I am patient. I have alot of time.
I appreciate Mr. Blades bona fides and his blogging seniority but he is just not being sensible at the moment.
He appears to have succumbed to the current lefty blogging cry of “we just want you to vent our frustrations for us. So what if it doesnt do us any good and may harm your political career. We dont care about you anyway because we failed to elect John Kerry or enough Democratic Senators in 2004.”
I would tell Mr. Blades to grow up but I think he’s already like 60 or something and I am only 21. 🙂
I would like him to wait awhile and think it over. His influence is large and if he gives up on the party think of the thundering herd that will follow.
The Greens might even get 4% of the vote next time but we will surely have another 4 years more of same as a result.
Dear young Mr. Richards,
I’ve been reading your posts with an increasingly bloody tongue from having to bite it so often. Clearly you are articulate and have an inpeccable vocabulary, but being “booksmart” and having a formal education does not equate to intelligence necesarilly as you seem to be proving all too well. You are simply naive if you believe that all that we are witnessing now will somehow be miraculously reversed by the democrats continueing to capitulate on issue after issue. But what bothers me even more than your glaring inexperience, is your habit of speaking to members of this community in a condescending way. Right down the end of your nose. Mr. Blades as you call him, has more political and social experience in his pinky than you do in all your ten digits. This diary shows how dedicated MB has been to the democratic party. So when he expresses this level of frustration, it means that the party is seriopusly fucking with it’s support.
Perhaps it is you who should think about growing up.
I tried yesterday but apparently, pete, is also a student of blog communities’ social structures as knows more about that than we do as well!
LOL!
PS pete, as someone who has conducted research online for many a year now, I must ask you straight up whether or not you are doing research here, because if you are and have not gained permission to do so, from both the blog owner and the individual posters, you are in violation of a number of different Human Subjects laws. A simple yes or no answer will do.
I do intend to seek a masters degree in communication and plan a thesis on the effects of community blogs on elections, both left and right. However, thats about three years out for me.
My posts here are not research, but I am very curious about certain positions taken by people and am not afraid to ask questions, even of my elders who seem barely able to tolerate my seemingly moderate path. I guess like you. You seem to be following me around everywhere. Its OK. I like you. You remind me of my mom. She s always on my case too.
My posts here are my opinion only.
(now that you’ve called me “mom”, I will start with the nicknames that go along with) I am not following you around — i simply look at my comments list and see if people have replied — I am also a frequenter of the Recent Comments list, where I found super’s comment just now….
I am nto talking about YOUR posts being research, but other people’s posts, either verbatim or paraphrased are off limits for your “studies” (your word not mine) without explicit written permission. Ask your university review committee about it.
As I said to you yesterday — people here are some of the most tolerant on the web — it’s your tone more than substance. But now I am wasting my breath again.
lol
If youmeant the crack about his age, I was kidding. Didnt you see my smiley face?
In fact, if I could be so precocious as to say so, you OLD people need to lighten up just a bit. I thought it was us yutes who were supposed to be depressed all the time!
You just want me to be seen and not heard, right?
Besides, at age 60, Mr. Blades is probably OLD enough to speak to me directly if he feels I have offended him in any way. I am encouraging him to stay the fight and not splinter off into a third party which will only reinforce conservative rule ( remember Green Party in 2000) for a long long time.
Think of how different things would be today if Mr. Gore, admittedly a mere moderate, had been elected in 2000 and reelected in 2004, if you want to be serious for a moment.
Ok I am heading for “time out” now.
and I know when to hold back my comments for the possibility, gasp, that I may actually learn something from somebody else here regardless of age. The arrogance in your posts is disruptive, perhaps you need to work on your listening skills. You seem to have alot of info crammed in your brain, but there is a way to share it without trashing others’ perspectives. Your technique needs some work…
I have to say, I have held my tongue more than a few times with regard to your comments, realzing that you are quite young and still on the parental dole. Perhaps you should consider how that limited experience affects your worldview, and try to learn something from others here without trying to ram your opinions down our throats. My thirteen year old has more respect for what the people here have to say than you apparently do.
Sorry to intervene in a conversation in which I have nothing to do with, but with all due respect GORE DID WIN IN 2000
listen man, I haven’t been stalking you like brinnainne (she’s known for it actually, she follows me around all the time and gives me 4’s… kinda cool actually, you should try getting on her good side… she’s even hung out at Camp Casey… not so shabby for someone her age!), but I gotta say, I think your time out is a good idea.
Nobody wants to shut you up, nobody hates you, we just disagree vehemently with your assessment of the situation, your tone (hey, I don’t really care since I can appreciate the arrogance of youth, but if it’s pissing people off so much perhaps modifying it a bit would be the grown up thing to do…), and your under-appreciation for how much the people on this blog HAVE SEEN & EXPERIENCED OF LIFE.
When people say “you dont know your history”, they don’t mean literally that you never opened a book. They mean, you weren’t around, you didn’t feel the mood on the street, you didn’t see what we saw, you don’t know how what happened that gets us to where we are now… and that this has been a long, steady march to the Bush Admin and that once, long ago, there used to be an opposition party. There is not now. And unless they decide to start earning our votes, we do have a choice… No party OWNS our votes. We own our votes. And if we decide that we would rather take our chances with a third party, or abstaining, or supporting an Independent, then by golly, who is anyone else to stop us? Or chastize us for not “getting” it… we get it. We get it all too well.
you know, what a democracy is.
anyhoo, thought I’d drop by and insert my, unasked for, opinion. stick around, listen more than you preach and you’ll be okay.
beautifully said.
and here’s to choice in all of it’s wonderful forms!
…you’re 60. I’ll most likely be dead then. So neither of us will be able to tell the other, “I told you so.” But you’ll know whether you were right or wrong.
Here’s hoping you a very long and healthy life. You will only be 97 when I turn 60. Hopefully, we will be able to visit and laugh about the bad old days.
BTW, my dad grew up in LA and he tells me the Herald-Examiner rocked!
Oh shit! Im late for class. Adios, indeed!
unlike our Democratic “leadership”, should just roll over and play along, because we have no choice. If we go along with your path, we’re just like parents who bitch about their kid getting in trouble all the time, but who continue to bail him out everytime he lands in the slammer.
But sooner or later, something breaks, and it ain’t pretty. It may take a mass exodus of progressives from supporting the Democratic status quo, which will unfortunately hand control of the country over to the Republicans (perhaps the moderates can seize control from the ultra-wingers), but like the kid waiting in jail for the parents who finally roll over and go back to sleep, the Democrats can’t say they didn’t see it coming…
As for me, I’m fortunate to have at least one Senator with principles (Boxer), and though I’ve been unhappy with Feinstein, her vote against Roberts went a long way to redeeming her, at least for this go-round. But if I don’t see the Democrats stepping up and getting some cojones, and especially if the Democratic nominee in 2008 is just another DLClone, I won’t hesitate to push the button for a alternative party candidate, or even leave the “Presidential” choice blank. I voted for John Anderson in 1980 (my first Presidential election), because I was unhappy with Carter’s performance yet as a native Californian, I could not in good conscience inflict Ronald Reagan on the rest of the country.
But that’s just me…I know that most American voters are nothing more than sheep, blindly selecting that “R” or “D”; that’s what the Powers That Be are counting on, and why they’ve got us by the balls…
here is my question, and keep in mind that I have only had 4 hours to think about this nominee:
What are your grounds for opposing this judge?
Because I am inclined to oppose any and all judges that Bush nominates. I assume the worst of all of them. Should this judge be opposed for being unqualified? For being a crony? For specific acts she has undertaken as a Republican operative, or as Bush’s counsel? For her religious affiliation? What?
Frankly, I am still trying to gather the facts and understand the role Reid played in this selection. I’m still trying to learn about this woman’s career.
I’m inclined to oppose for the simple reason she was nominated by Bush. But that is a little too simplistic, since we cannot defeat 3 years worth of nominees, can we?
Again, I have no problem with what you are saying, but I want to understand your reasoning.
It’s certainly worth bearing in mind as we assess the politics of this nomination that Sen. Reid is strongly anti-choice, and thus cannot be counted on to work in favor of protecting Roe v. Wade. Since Reid is on the wrong side of the abortion issue, his approval of this key appointment is not necessarily an argument in Miers’ favorite.
Why do I oppose this nominee (or, to be more blunt about it, why would I have favored having the Democrats lay the rhetorical ground work for filibustering her)?
But the argument against her that the Democrats could have used is that she’s Brownie in a skirt. Basically, given the administration’s long track record of putting otherwise unqualified loyalists in key positions, when Bush nominates a thinly credentialed ultra-loyalist who has no judicial experience to a seat on the SCOTUS, the burden of proof, which is usually on the opponents of a judicial nominee, should switch firmly to the proponents. This nomination simply doesn’t pass the smell test.
Had Russ Feingold taken to the Senate floor at 9 am this morning (as Ted Kennedy did immediately after the Bork nomination) and thrown the gauntlet down in this way, it would have started things off on the right track.
Instead we get the lovefest from Schumer and Reid. Pathetic doesn’t begin to capture this response. Anticipating a lukewarm Democratic response, I had begun to draft a diary comparing the 2005 Democrats to the 1864 Democrats, who ran Gen. George B. McClellan against Lincoln. McClellan had been in command of Union forces during the first year of the Civil War, but Lincoln had removed him from command, as he had simply refused to engage the enemy. I was going to compare the 2005 Democrats’ keep-you-powder-dry “strategy” on judicial appointments with McClellan’s waging of the Civil War.
No longer. As catfish pointed out in a comment on CrookedTimber, the generals to whom the Dems should be compared are the Washington Generals, the phony team that always lost the Harlem Globetrotters.
Very good–I agree the Democrats have made themselves the Washington Generals of politics. This was not necessary. America is crying out for a clear alternative to Republican cronyism and money love, and Democrats refuse to give them one.
It is crucial to note that as an anti-choice Democrat, Harry Reid does not care about Meirs’ views on women’s health care. It’s just not on his list.
After Roberts, we’ve ceded any claim to demand documentation. I hpoe Reid can make a good argument purely about qualifications and cronyism now that he’s declared his affection for her, because Reid, and everyone who voted for him, chose to take crucial issues like access to abortion off the table for the Democratic Party.
…a crony. I’d like to say she should be rejected because she said Bush was the most brilliant man she’d ever met. But everybody has a blindspot or two.
I think that’s the tack the Dems should take: she’s not qualified for the job. It’s a totally reasonable, completely non-partisan position to take, and it lacks any undesirable subtleties.
Sure, they should say, Miers ought to be a shoo-in for a county judgeship. But nominees to be Supreme Court justices, left, right or center, ought to have some job experience, and Miers has no more experience being a judge than you or I do. The Bushites will argue that she has spent plenty of time watching judges in the courtroom, but heck, so has everyone who watches CourtTV.
Her views are not important, tactically speaking. The cronyism angle — which is, frankly, preaching to the choir — isn’t important either. It’s that Miers simply lacks the qualifications to be a Supreme Court justice. Judge Judy has better qualifications than Miers.
But yeah, this social democrat is wondering if having a fake opposition isn’t much worse than having no opposition at all. Nature abhors a vacuum, after all, but with the Democratic Party acting as a spoiler for real opposition parties at the polls, there’s not much likelihood of progress.
…when BooMan asked me his question. That’s because I’m sure we’re going to see a dissection of Harriet Miers’s views and record over the next few weeks, but I am wondering why we should care. It’s like asking a dog-catcher how he would handle the lion-tamer’s job. She’s unqualified, pure and simple, unless everybody with a law degree is qualified.
Better to retreat now and fight another day. And when, pray tell, might that day come?
When the Democrats regenerate their spines. Right now they are too busy representing their own best interests and ours only on occasion.
Excuse me?
I fucking A have a spine. It’s the Dem leadership that has regeneration problems. They lick their fingers and test the wind. And the wind is blowing from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
it’s usually not even a glass, but a swift kick in our asses while we are holding up the Constitutions saying, “Please Sir, may I have … my rights???”
Of course this reminds me of Silence of the Lemmings scene where we all are supposed to simmer down and “it puts the constitution in the basket”…
They – whoever “THEY” are, are trying to tell us to simmer down, let them play their games the way they need too – but they aren’t out in the playing field seeing the aches and pains and death DUE to the game.
Limelite said it best when he mentioned that Obama needs to read up on MLK and that NO ONE ever was just given their rights… that they were all fought for, arrested for, marched for, – they never were by compromise or playing a game. They were screamed for. We need to keep screaming and demanding an end to the games and for them to come into the light of reality and take a look around – because this LIBERAL won’t put up with their Elephant/Donkey games anymore.
I say, let’s fire em all. (ok I didn’t say to let G-d sort em out… ) 🙂
I wished I could have met you in DC. But I have a feeling we will be. BEcause we moms and dads will have to do the footwork and the hollering till this bloody war on so many fronts has been put down.
Sorry for ranting and length… healing and decompressing one might say.
Are we so desperate that even the most Pyrrhic victory can raise our spirits?
I’m not. Thanks for writing this kid.
The real killer is that we are the people making the argument against the “Tweedledee vs. Tweedledum” mindset that keeps some on the left from voting at all. And as you say, that Precinct Captain hat has become uncomfortable. I may let someone else wear it.
After I finish my phone calls for Referenda C & D today, and do my final door knocking with my volunteers this weekend, that is…
This is not a qualified Supreme Court pick. the buzz among working attorneys (all of us had the dream in Law School at least once) is that WE’RE ALL QUALIFIED TO BE ON THE SUPREME COURT. God, what’s happened to the profession? Oh, right it’s incompetent George and his paper flogger. Just swell, the paper flogger of the most imcompetent president since before the Civil War. all you “politics is tactics” types might just want to wake up to the quality issue.
I’ve argued with fellow radicals who have said there is no difference between the parties and apathetics who have asked what the party ever did for them. I’ve supported compromises, and tactical maneuvering and slick strategy with the thought that these would keep this or that outcome from being worse than it could be. I’ve bit my tongue and backed Democratic candidates who gave me ulcers because the alternative seemed so much worse.
Me too, me too. As I commented here a couple weeks ago, I’ve even found myself arguing with anti-whaling activists who cynically announced there was no difference between the parties and then — despite their enormous worries about ocean pollution — decided to support George Bush, ostensibly they said, because they thought he’d bring about a revolution in environmentalism (a la James Watt).
That’s just an example of the ends that people will go to in order to convince themselves that they can effect change through clever cunning.
How about plain ol’ straightforward Democratic principles?
How ’bout standing up for those?
Was it really — I mean, really — necessary for Harry Reid to issue a press release favorable to Miers this morning on his Senate Web site?
What does THAT accomplish?
And there’s stunning silence — best I’ve seen — from the rest of the Democratic leadership in the Senate.
MB, permit me one more desperate imagining, and laugh away!
Could it possibly be that the lead Democrats see a far larger scandal brewing — say, multiple indictments of WH top people by Fitzgerald — and don’t wish to occupy time and calendar space with a nomination that is sure to succeed?
That they want to ride the biggest and fastest train that is comin’ down the road?
Like I said … laugh away. Just wracking my brain trying to think why, why, why …
Because the Democratic leadership knows that you will vote “D” in 2006 and 2008 NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO.
Until you and people like you let go of the fantasy that the Democratic party is a liberal party, and grab onto the reality that a third party is needed, NOTHING IS GOING TO CHANGE.
What, exactly, will it take to convince you of this?
What will it take?
Long list of other choices. Go shopping.
Yep. I like the Greens, myself.
http://www.therealdifference.org/issues2.html
Because the Democratic leadership knows that you will vote “D” in 2006 and 2008 NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO.
This is absolutely key. Until liberals defect from the party in substantial numbers, the party will not give a shit what we think. We are, after all, in the bag. And as long as we’re in the bag, they have no incentive whatsoever to listen to us, much less do our bidding.
The argument will be offered by Dem partisans that too much is at stake for us to spend an election cycle handing the Republicans victory after victory just to send a message to the DNC. When will that ever not be the case? I say too much is at stake for us to let the party continue on its present path. If we don’t shake them to the foundations during the mid-term elections, they’re not going to be listening in 2008.
And if they don’t listen then, we move on. What is the Democratic Party without liberals? Twenty-five, maybe fifty middle class white guys, all of whom run blogs. (I’m only half-kidding.) We don’t need the Democratic Party, but it cannot exist without us. It’s time to make sure they know that.
The question I have is: is this a pantomime? Who is running from a fight here?
What may happen out of this is that GOopers start turning on each other.
I would get off on this spectacle, but the feeling simply wouldn’t last long.
To me, that is no way for Dems win back voters, for the country to know where we stand, for us to wrest Congress and the White House from these guys.
It would mean that the Democratic Party, with or without Dean, is simply laying down.
The last time Pat Buchanan toed the party line was when he was writing speeches for Nixon. I wouldn’t take him as being representative of the Republicans. If he was, he might have won at least one of his many elections.
Bill Kristol claims to be depressed and demoralized.
Very interesting the way this is breaking down as we see opinions coming in from both sides. I rec. reading that article you linked.
…demoralization, that piece is in so many ways infuriating.
Kristol is not an idiot, but he pimps for such legal giants as Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown as potential candidates with “a visible and distinguished constitutionalist track record.” Anyone who’d see either of these two as ideal justices has set the bar so low that little stock can be put in his disappointment.
Kristol is reporting PNAC‘s views on the issue, nothing else.
extremely warmed over fascism, with an American flavor.
That entire group of rightwing extremists has nothing but the demise of America as a Democracy as its core achievement.
That Corporatism is the fundamental arbitrator of everything that occurs within the US and the Government is born of, for and by the Corporate fascists.
I agree, and I’m just pointing out Kristol’s seminal role with that organization, for which I no adjective really fits except “evil.”
My own take is that the Dems are being played for fools and that Miers is meant to be rejected by a bipartisan bloc.
Sadly, that actually seems more plausible to me than anything else. Miers is rejected by Republicans (who cares how the Democrats vote–they’re the minority, cannot vote together, and have already signaled their capitulation through Reid). She isn’t sufficiently conservative to please the theocons, so she is defeated from the right.
Then the next nominee is a clone of Scalia, and wins easily, guaranteeing an intrusive, far-right Supreme Court that is deferential to the Executive branch.
Rove is kind of person I’d trust to develop and implement a strategy like that. Democrats doing something similarly devious? Not so much.
…you’ll see some healthy skepticism. And I’m not anywhere near 100% on this.
But it seems to be the only think that makes sense.
So you think it’s a shell game? so that the pathetic dems will wear themselves out on the oppo side and then have to give in on the next nut-wing nominee? HMMM
LOSE OR LOSE.
…has it that the White House is in disarray, Bush is on the bottle again, the reactionary plutocratic wing and the socially reactionary wing are out of sync with each other and all the Dems need do is hang tight until November 2006 when GOP incompetence, corruption and infighting will make 1994 look like a skirmish and we’ll have FDR-sized majorities for the Dems lasting decades.
Conventional wisdom was that Bush couldn’t win a second term.
When do we realize (and by “we” I mean the Dem leadership) that NOW is the time to fight. And fight on. And on. Until the country recognizes the horrific disaster that is the Bush admin.
The country is in shambles, they are destroying the environment and the social safety net, ruining the economy, literally killing people & torturing people… when pray tell is enough, enough?
When the polls tell them it’s enough, and their advisors have called around The Hill to see if others think it’s enough, and maybe Newsweek’s cover finally says “Enough!” and then after they get re-elected and whoops where has the time gone I guess I’ll just take this cushy lobbying job.
I’m saying that Rove and Bush know exactly what they’re doing. And it’s either that she’s a Trojan Horse with much more to her than we all know. Or she’s the red herring to be knocked down by an assortment of Dems and wingnuts, so that Bush has a clear mandate to go radical right. And he’ll be able to say, “We tried to offer a bipartisan moderate, but that wasn’t good enough!”
The conventional wisdom here is that Rove has had a stroke and Bush is picking a pal. I think the pal would’ve been Alberto, who’s younger and would have been the very first Hispanic justice, which would have appealed to the Latino vote the GOP so covets.
I am not the only one saying this. Snippets and links are in my diary today.
…Miers being a sacrifice play. The problem: Does Bush come out stronger on the other side of hearings that ultimately lead to Ms. Miers’s rejection, or does he strengthen the Democratic opposition for a third nomination – which has been lame so far. If Scotusblog is right and Miers fails the test, I think Bush could end up weaker, and in no position to put forth a red-meat radical for the Next Nominee. And I think Rove knows that. My guess is that it all chalks up to loyalty.
Yeah, I read it the opposite — a busted confirmation gives Bush a mandate to push rightward for a party-line vote.
And even then, the Dem opposition will be weak, or just tiresome.
Either way, the GOP goes strengthened into the election, while the Dems will continue to blame their base for not being conveniently conservative enough.
…is right, I suppose.
But, on your “either way” remark, I totally agree.
is that Pollyanna is right and Miers is a pro-choice progressive Souter-type. Unfortunately, with her Bar lobbying against Roe and her attendance/membership (?) in Texans for Fetal Life, I’m not optimistic. And her lotto ties don’t look promising, either.
But who knows? Everyone will look pretty disgusting after a short time in party politics.
MyDD has some more right-wing reactions.
well Democrats have been fools and weaklings for a long time. On display too as such… LOL.
Nuclear compromise led directly to this. And Bush is laughing so hard. As is Rove and as is Cheney.
such disgust, there is no outrage left for the immense failure. And the hacks who flacked the failures as “brilliant”. But then I am not now a Democrat nor LOL did I ever state I was one, when I was not. I pick one or the other…not both.
Schumer used the “powder” crap again this am, they really shoveled out ANYTHING and it pretty much went down… now he is bitching about the “liberal interest groups”, I do believe we heard that crap too… Politians HAVE to be held accountable and not given passes.
Nuclear compromise led directly to this. And Bush is laughing so hard. As is Rove and as is Cheney.
The way I see it, the nuclear compromise accomplished the same thing that eliminating the filiibuster would have (ie, anyone Bush nominates gets approved), but allowed the Republicans to come out smelling fine.
Yep, that Harry Reid is a strategic genius. Just not for the Dems’s side.
to be completely denied me without some kind of fight and if the DINO’s in congress won’t stand up for me then to hell with them. I will continue to support only those candidates who believe that our Constitution is a living breathing document that was designed to reflect the changes that occur within our country over time.
I will talk to every Democrat and Progressive I come in contact with to stop giving money to the Sellouts who currently reside in congress and to start pulling candidates to challenge the DINO’s who have sold out my interests time and again. I have been politically active these last 15 years far more than I have ever been previously. Why? Because I have watched the Extremists on the right slowly, methodically and with calculated results, work to destroy the Bill of Rights to our Constitution.
I will not stand around kicking my feet in the dust and grovel about how our Congress simply failed to address this fundamental assault upon our Civil Rights. I say if you are not willing to stand up to the Fascist who want nothing more than to destroy America, then get out of the way and let someone with backbone and courage stand up to them.
I am getting ready to throw my own hat into the ring in my little town. There is a whole bunch of Bushco ethics occurring in our City and County governments and I figure what the hell, I already pissed most of them off anyway, so here I go.
The DLC can kiss my ass as my money and time will be going to those candidates like Hackett who are unafraid to call Bushco and his criminal enterprise exactly what they are, Chickenhawk criminals. I urge all of you not to flee from the party, make the bastards more afraid of you then they are of the GOP thugs who currently scare them so fiercely.
I am sending emails to every Corporation that supports Bushco and the DINO’s and telling them that I will no longer buy anything they make or sell and telling everyone I know to do the same, if they want to play hard ball, then lets hurt them where it counts, in the bottom line.
Fuck this pantywaist wait until the time is ripe, these fucking DINO’s will wait until their time is long gone and my rights as a Citizen of the United States have been completely stripped from me. Stand up and be counted, yell it loud and clear that enough is enough and if you can’t do the job then get the fuck out of the way, allow someone who is willing, has a backbone and some courage to stand up these fascist thugs.
don’t get in ghostdancers way’s way.
Awesome rant–I’m screaming alongside you friend.
” There is a whole bunch of Bushco ethics occurring in our City and County governments and I figure what the hell,”
Yup. I decided to. Why not. Who else is going to. Some flog it and blog it kos?
ha.
I am a product of this land. It is a land worth fighting for. They can’t have it. They have no redeeming qualities to make claims on it.
none.
AWESOME!! Go notcho!!
Will we be hearing about it? I hope so!
You GO! gdw! This is so incredible — two hats in in one thread — mine is off to you!
Please fill us in on how it goes and what you learn, I may be following in your footsteps some time in the not-so-distant future!
Song of my mother’s generation–(WWII)– Roll me over,in the clover,lay me down and do it again.
Reid came out with his statement that was discouraging, however, I don’t see the Dems en masse packing up their toys and going home just yet. It ain’t over til it’s over…or until the fat lady sings…or whatever. We’re just hours past the announcement and both sides are already bailing on their parties. Maybe we all need to take a deep breath here.
Perhaps it is premature. But here’s what kills any optimism I can possibly muster.
I’m trying to take a deep breath, but whenever I exhale I hear a little voice saying “Fuck it, we’re done.”
…little warning shot across the DP’s bow. I’m saying: “Look, I’m a 58-year-old stalwart of the party who has worked to elected Democrats since before I could even vote. I’ve stuck with the party – through thick and thin – even when not a handful voted against the Tonkin Gulf resolution, even when there were more Republicans for the Civil Rights Act than Democrats against it, even when Hubert Humphrey was picked over Gene McCarthy, even when the leadership excoriated McGovern. When Reagan Democrats bailed, I stayed. When Bill Clinton pushed for welfare reform and unfettered free trade pacts, I stuck with the party, not just voting but putting money and time and energy into the battle to keep Republicans out of the White House, and a GOP majority out of the Senate and House of Representatives.
I’m not overboard … yet.
But, as I see it right now, I’ve proved myself to the Democrats. Now I’d like some reciprocation, please.
go ahead, jump. You’ll feel better. The waters fine, and we’re all ready to help each other, as those on the upper decks let steerage get swamped.
MB, I’m reposting an earlier comment here in case you missed it. You’ve been banging your head against a wall for a long time with little to show for it. Even the strongest among us cannot continue in the face of massive headaches. The old, establishment dems are part of the problem, not part of the solution. Let’s keep at it until 2006 to try to get a new crop of progressives elected who may have a chance of changing the face of this party.
If we don’t succeed, then perhaps it will be time to bail. I wanted to give up after the November elections. I was convinced to keep on, keepin’ on. For now, I’m still willing to fight.
Like you, however, I’m just about at my wits end. If we can’t make strides by 2006, I’ll be looking for a home in some other country and will extend an invitation for the disaffected among us to join me there.
Keep at it for now. We need people like you!
I understand your frustration as much as I’m able to. I’ve never worked as hard for my Canadian Liberals as you have for your Democrats and after they moved to the center during the 90s, ending Chretien’s reign with adscam (our own little political scandal) I was extremely weary. We got a new leader, Paul Martin, and I was undecided about voting Liberal again until 2 weeks before the last election. Martin promised to clean up the mess the federal Liberals made and I decided to hold him to that.
Our circumstances are different because of our system but he ended up leading a minority gov’t and with the help of the lefty-left party, the NDP, the Libs have been forced to turn left again somewhat and he has moved forward in fixing what happened. The moral of ths story is that I do know what it’s like to have a lifelong committment to a party that has let me down and I know how hard it is when push comes to shove but I guess we all have to choose which hill to die on. I just don’t know yet that the Miers nomination is it based on one day’s input from the Dems. I definitely encourage you though to scream far and wide to those in power about how you feel. They need to hear it.
all of the screaming on the right is a pantomime, that’s all. Besides, who cares what they say when Reid will see that his friend sails right through the Senate. THIS is the deal the Leahy was intimating. THIS is why Obama stopped in at dKos and patted us all on the head. They’re so wrapped up in their insular little blackslapping culture that they can’t see how wrong for the post she is.
Time to leave this hopelessly corrupt party.
Thanks for posting this over here too MB, this needed to be said. Please keep saying it loud and clear.
I know a thing or two about. lol.
My take is that if Miers does not deserve to sit on the SC, then she should not make it out of committee…and that would take GOP votes.
I think there’s two standards, if a nominee is weak, they should not make it to a vote…in this political climate…period.
If Miers makes it to the full Senate, she is likely in. Like any nominee would be. The whole gang of fourteen thing only really works with troglydytes, not pre-approved folks.
Aieee.
I don’t know about Reid. Some people talk like he puts the verbs on the end of his sentences. (hint: yoda) If that’s true, then he buttered up Miers simply because he knew she wouldn’t make it out of committee. Maybe. I really doubt she’d make a good Justice.
She seems both a crony..and..well, let’s put it this way…if she’s confirmed do any of us want to have to read an opinion of hers? I mean, she gives no indication of an actual command of you know….
language, rhetoric, nuance, judicial tempermant, uh, the spirit of the law.
And, if by chance Roberts is closer to Scalia and Thomas than we think….then another right winger would mean….
we will always be merely one vote away from overturning Brown v. Board of Education….basically.
And that’s what this essay was REALLY about.
I am trying to figure out, how in such a short period of time you went from admonishing those who were “apprehensive” to say the least about staying with the party to you new found feelings of rebellion.
I have always know what it is I wanted from this party all my life and I have never waivered in my attempts at making it better. Which is why I never accepted the bullshit triangulations of the past. And for which I have been trolled and pummelled by your best friends in Orange Square.
So pardon me if I am just not… feeling this
…who my friends are. And you should make no assumptions based on where I blog in that regard. I don’t troll rate folks except on the rarest occasions, and I am not responsible for anyone who does.
And, except for a few weeks in the run-up to November last, I didn’t admonish anyone, I urged and encouraged people to stick with the party because I thought it would put up some fight on some crucial issues. The Supreme Court seems to me as crucial as they come. If the party isn’t willing to fight there, then where?
You are blogging with the biggest sociopathic goon in the entire blogosphere DHinMI… don’t tell me you hadn’t noticed?
Surely, you have been aware or part of the backroom shenanigans at DK. They have been plotting this shit for months with the aid of Simon Rosenberg and his trusty 200 million dollar “think tank” which was suppose to sharpen the Dem media machine… but in pratice it is being used to stifle dissent and spew misinformation and cover capitulating Dems behinds… ie like what Kos has been spewing all day.
…but, as to being “part of the backroom shenanigans,” even when I was a front pager I was not part of any of the operations end of things. I posted my pieces, period, just as I do now. I never banned anybody, I never purged anybody, I never censored anybody, and I have probably given out 20 zeroes in the entire 23 months that this has been an option at Daily Kos.
You can slam my opinions all you like, call me names, trash my alleged naivete or johnny-come-lateliness to what you’ve always known as the truth – after all, that’s part of the charm of blogging. But when you start questioning my integrity, be prepared for reciprocation.
Blogging on the same page with DHinMi questions anyone’s intregrity… Because he did “ban, purge, censor, troll rate, pummel” dissenting opinions… and you seemed to be “OK” with that… that is a cause for concern.
.
Blogging on the same page with DHinMi questions anyone’s integrity…
This is no place for a personal feud with another blogger of an incident at another blog. Never touch a person’s integrity without sound arguments, just accusations won’t cut it.
Take it easy, drink a cup of strong coffee and return with rationale to offer a honest debate. I don’t want to start rating these comments, but consider this a friendly warning: you crossed a line in blogger trust.
▼ ▼ ▼
It is QUITE rationale when you have read a fraction of what DHinMI has written or done… to which MB has quietly acquiesce… DHinMI is the head henchman who has only two sides… you where either with him or against him.
If you got a problem with DHinMI, then lay into him(her?). The idea that MB is guilty by association because he blogs at the same place is so absurd it doesn’t even merit response. Because MB chooses to blog about other things he considers important, that’s “quietly acquiesce”ing?
Geez, Parker, take a quaalude and chill. You’re sounding as shrill as you accuse DHinMI of being.
.
Just time and place for a discussion, start a new diary and address DhinMI. I hate people hijacking a topic and/or diary.
My war needs not to be your war. That’s how WWI and WWII engulfed the world.
I have great appreciation for MB’s contribution in comments and diaries. I will judge what I see and read, nothing else, and I intend to focus on tackling social and political issues. Censors?
▼ ▼ ▼
Perhaps you are right this is not the time nor the place… I just wondering out loud about MB sudden transformation…particularly when just a few days ago MB was calling me a purist a term “DHinMI and his crew of jackels” liked to call anyone who “got out of line”.
Perhaps it is just a knee jerk reaction to someone who seemed to like hanging out with the jackel crowd in Orange Square…
Parker, I agree with you completely about DHinMI. He/she threatened me with banning twice at Daily Kos, and I’m not combatative. His/her writing is not worthwhile. But I also agree that’s not a topic for this diary, nor is it fair to tar Meteor Blades with DHinMI’s problems.
I’m not surprised by MB encouraging us to stay focused, then coming close to jumping ship. Many of us here are undergoing the same internal debate. When you care strongly about progress, you by necessity have a love-hate relationship with the Democratic Party.
Mostly hate, lately.
DHinMI is such an extreme case that you really really really have to like the guy to be within 20 feet of him… It is almost like saying Eva Braun should not be held responsible for Hitler… which is true… but you gotta question her sanity for being around him in the first place. DHinMI is an aquired taste and I question anyone who is buddy buddy with that thug.
…for the use of the term “purist” in describing you because it didn’t truly express what I meant. I never knew anybody else had ever called you that.
You mean to tell me that you never heard Kos and DHinMI and Co (and you obviously) ..berate MANY people as purists because they wanted to protect their civil rights?
…troll-rated or name-called someone who wanted to defend their civil rights. Since my first foray in to civil rights as part of SNCC in Freedom Summer, I have often disagreed with the particular approach of someone toward obtaining or maintaining their civil rights – including reproductive rights – but I have always and will always speak for and fight for the broadest possible reading of those rights.
Hey if you hang out with that pack of jackels… then you must agree with them
Hey MB, mostly I agree with you, but let me remind you of your banning of me from dKos when I posted various reasons why I thought Kerry was going to lose… You were furious–for some reason I have never understood–and made a special effort to ban both my username and my IP address…
this is really irritating. I am no fan of DH, as most everyone knows. What that has to do with you, or Kos, or Kid Oakland, or Armando?
Nada.
I’m tired of all the conspiratorial thinking. We don’t coordinate our message within sites, let alone between them.
Parker, this is trollish bullshit.
We don’t coordinate our message within sites
Yeah you do… that is what the conference calls are about.
Hey…MB just called me a “purist” for the EXACT things he is saing in this diary.
addressing you and some of your more outrageous and outlandish accusations but this one really sends me over the top. If Booman and the other bolgs are so conspiratorial that you are offended, my Suggestion is that you leave, if you are so offended.
You attack, attack, attack, rarely offering anything constructive to create solutions to the many issues and problems that you continue to see and complain about.
Get off your ass and run for an office, start attending local school board meetings, county commission/supervisor/board meetings, city council meetings. If you want to bitch and complain then do so in a place that you can facilitate a difference.
The fascists asshats that control my country right now are enough on my plate, without having to hear someone attack the very people I turn to seek some solutions to the problems that face me where I live. And parker, I live in a very very red state with a whole shit load of asshats and talibaptists who want nothing more than to control my daughters life and indoctrinate my children into a hateful religion.
So attack me all you want, spew forth more of your vitriol about how no one is repectful of your right to complain and bitch and never offer any kind of solutions. And when you are done and you are standing all alone wondering where everyone has gone, take a good hard look in the mirror.
Now do you want to start finding solutions or do you want to just keep spewing?
…my Suggestion is that you leave, if you are so offended.
That’s what led me here.
I agree with what you’re saying: Parker should work harder at being constructive. But let’s please not get into STFU territory.
to parker,
if she is so offended then by all means leave, but if she has some constructive ideas on how to change the Democratic party from DINO’s to true progressives then by all means offer them up.
I have repeatedly read her comments about others here, being critical and offended when confronted by her sometimes overbearing demeanor. She can be whatever she wants to be, but challenging Booman that he and other bloggs conspire together is just way over the top for me. And if she really believed that, then by all means she should feel free to leave.
All I am asking of parker is be less critical, more constructive and help us create solutions. She is by no means dumb or lazy and I hope she will bring to the table some solutions that might help us get our country out of the clutches of the fascists who currently control it.
I understand, and I agree Parker’s pushing it.
I just wanted to say “feel free to leave” is a rhetorical line I hate to see crossed. That’s all. Peace.
to know what coordination we have?
Every once in a while Susan sends me an email saying ‘I’m writing about x.’ She does it so we can be sure we are not duplicating our efforts.
Once in a while we ask each other what we think of something, but we don’t always agree.
Sometimes I share emails with Armando, Kid Oakland, Chris Bowers, and even Meteor Blades. But usually it is to comment on each others writing after the fact and exchange pleasantries, or in Armando’s case lemon merangue pies.
Sometimes there is a political figure that wants to talk to us and we have a conference call. We ask the politician questions, they answer, and then we hang up.
There is almost no coordination at all, even on these conference calls.
As for DH, I can’t stand that guy. He knows it, everyone who pays attention to me knows it. So what? It doesn’t mean I would feel the need to quit a website that he writes for, particularly one like the Next Hurrah that is not really a community site.
Plus, I can’t understand how you can disrespect MB, of all people. If he is now coming closer to your position maybe you should welcome that rather than calling him a hypocrite.
Fine you may not coordinate …but that is the basis for Rosenberg “Grand Media MEssaging” plan… creating an echo chamber… first I thought it was to be against the GOP but now it is looking like he has tilted the megaphones inwards towards the base to try and get to march in lockstep.
MB just called me a purist … which is what the Orangethugs love to beat up people with… so like I said it is a knee jerk reaction and it will take more than one post… because he has been pushing the same mess that DHinMI has for the past year and a half ….albeit in nicer tones…
And yeah… if you acted like a complete sociopath like DHinMI… I too would wonder what the hell is Susanhu smoking to be around you.
I have long since given up on the Democratic Party as being the instrument for the change I think is needed in this country. I will, of course, vote for good Democratic candidates when, on occasion, they actually surface, and I usually end up pulling the lever for the lesser-of-two-evils Democratic choice that I am usually confronted with, although I have on multiple occasions voted none-of-the-above (in Russia, where I lived for nine years, they actually have a none-of-the-above lever in the voting booth).
But I am NOT a Democrat, and I firmly believe that only if we are willing to build another party that we, the people, have control over, that truly represents the interests of middle-class, working-class, and poor people, do we have any possibility of progressive change in this country. It must start locally, and BUILD. The reason third parties always fail in this country is that they want to go for the big one before they have done the tough work to solidify the grassroots.
In my view, we are wasting our time, energy, and precious resources trying to make the Democratic party into something it is not, and probably never will be. The Schumers, Reids, Clintons, Bidens, Leahys (I include him because he’s MY senator) don’t give a flyin flock about our interests (or, for that matter, the good of the country). Their interest is in their own personal power and position. As long as they have that — and they will as long as we keep voting for them — they’ll continue to screw us. When was the last time you saw a Democratic politician actually put his/her political position at risk for the sake of a principle? For the good of the country? Think anyone could write a Profiles in Courage book about any in this lot?
MB, I’m way past giving them one more chance. I’ll vote for one of them when it suits my purpose, but my overarching purpose is to throw ALL those bums out.
That’s worth MY time, energy, and resources.
I know there are a few glib young whipper-snappers hanging about who think the old farts are too gloom and doom.
I’ll tell you this.
I think we got a choice.
We are long past “politics as usual”. Either we make some fundamental changes to the way this country is governed — and who holds political power — or we are headed over the cliff. History is littered with the carcasses of “great nations” whose appetite for power exceeded their ability to wield it.
We are right there, right now. It may be too late already.
If I am right, then, unfortunately, there might not be anyone around for me to say “I told you so” to.
I’m getting a little nervous at the tone of the comments on this and a couple of other threads here.
I’m all into calling out the D’s to stand up for our values AND I don’t think I’m ready to leave the party (yet). I’m trying to listen to it all and of course greatly value the opinions of someone like MB.
I love the pond and have found great comfort here. But I’m not quite ready to join the “Democrats suck so lets go elsewhere.”
I just hope we can keep the conversation open?
I’m whoring for MB here, because I personally feel that this is the debate we ought to be having:
Let’s keep talking.