(comment by ROOF deleted by host due to usual irrelevance to post)
Posted by ROOF at January 16, 2006 04:27 PMYes, Gore didn't throw down the gauntlet, he threw it at the boy kings smirking mug.
Steve lays down a call to arms. I will give my coin to Dean, who speaks for me!
Who will join me mateys? To the cannons me lovelies, and a kiss of grape to the unsurpers.
Posted by SnarkyShark at January 16, 2006 04:36 PMI think that as the sort of vulnerability that this worthy effort intends to lay at the feet of Republicans, so also to DINOs like Joe Lieberman and Joe Biden. To do anything else means that the situation isn't solved but is instead delayed. The nation cannot afford such a delay, as time grows short to save what remains of our Constitutional liberties.
I can't understand why Reid, Pelosi, et al have given up on Alito. Sure, the guy will be confirmed. But we owe it to history to fight this battle. Alito's (and Bush's) scourge on the Constitution will be with us for generations.
Posted by Cookie Monster at January 16, 2006 04:41 PMNegativity and no message of hope will mean a loss for the democrats again at the ballot box. You have to offer something other than accusations for people to WANT to vote for you and not just against the other guy. Painting the next election as the Republicans want to protect you too much is a loser. The president knows that, and you make that the number one issue, will help in keeping Republicans in power for a generation.
Posted by caliman at January 16, 2006 04:58 PMI agree with cookie.
Steve's post sounds wonderful but it doesn't exclude the filibuster. If anything it mandates it as proof of the democrats' willingness to fight the important issue.
I disagree that senators in red states will suffer if they vote against Alito. Right now anything associated with Bush is unpopular, especially in the wake of Katrina/Rita and the Iraq debacle. Let those red state senators wave the flag for excess executive power rather than abortion if they are truly fearful.
Backing down without a fight on abortion will not only doom us long term but also in the short term as women/liberals walk away in disgust.
None of us have any reaon to trust the democrats after this one.
Posted by Cath at January 16, 2006 04:59 PMSteve,
I'm probably in the minority here but I agree with what you have to say. And yes, there will be many battles ahead. Fortunately, the law is on our side.
Negativity and no message of hope will mean a loss for the democrats again at the ballot box. You have to offer something other than accusations for people to WANT to vote for you and not just against the other guy. Painting the next election as the Republicans want to protect you too much is a loser. The president knows that, and you make that the number one issue, will help in keeping Republicans in power for a generation.
Posted by caliman at January 16, 2006 04:58 PM
*****
Painting it as "the GOP are criminal lying thugs" is the way its going to go down, you soon to be marginalized fuck.
Posted by at January 16, 2006 05:15 PM"Despite my disappointment, this may in fact be the smart play, since it was never likely that Reid could command 44 votes against Alito with several of our red-state Democrats facing reelection this year."
I've been hard on you when I think you've been wrong, so major props for being right on this point. It's easy - too easy - to go for the red meat of the day. The goal, and this is something that Dems can be easily dristracted from, is winning. Yes, we don't want to be as corrupt at the right is, but we need to hold power if we are to govern. So let's play hardball for real and skip the traditional jousts.
Fuck Alito, and fuck the Republicans for thinking we're so stupid as to get hung up on his nomination. They're bleeding and bleeding badly, and it's time to do them in. It's time to take aim at the seats of power and claim them.
Posted by Grinch at January 16, 2006 05:23 PMI still say filibuster the prick, and use the debate time to rail on Bush's constant and unrelenting abuse of power and the GOP Congress' complicity in it all.
Fuck them. It's hardball time.
Again, I say: Do the right thing, and let the politics follow. Enough with the "calculated strategy." That shit doesn't work.
Posted by God Of War at January 16, 2006 05:36 PMOne of the reasons that the Repuglicans have been successful is that they have all droned the same party line since the Days of Newt. The Democrats are a more diverse party, with a multitude of opinions. Democrats really need someone who they can rally around (Gore?) and can clearly articulate (in the required sound bites) what's wrong with the way this country has been governed.
Posted by Cookie Monster at January 16, 2006 05:48 PMWell, that unitary executive power thingy really scares me...and don't you think Shrub will defer to it immediately knowing Alito (and 4 others) are in his pocket just waiting to legitimize it for him. So I still say, what do they have to lose. And.... the waiting for the next battle and fight...nope, heard that, been there too many times before from dems. Nope, it's time to stand up and lose like a man, but at least fight like hell in doing so. There's no cohesive democratic strategy here, it's always the same...wait til the next battle, we'll get them next time...but the battles are running out. People don't want to see the democrats continue to roll over against these bullies because they are already perceived as weak and by rolling over yet again, well it reinforces that perception. I'd rather be called an obstructionist rather than weak...because at least it means I put up a fight for once. And democrats can win if they show the world how inept and incompetent Junior is as he can't protect civil liberties and fight the war on terror at the same time. Why can't he do both, incompetence.
Posted by emal at January 16, 2006 05:51 PMIt was a magnificent speech, as you point out. I've always thought of the movie title, "white men can't jump" when he has spoken before. He's been too wooden, or stiff, or something like that. Today, he was channeling MLK and it looked really good on him. But more than his animated delivery, he was informed and clear. If there was an exageration or spin in the speech, I missed it.
it was just one clear truth after another. The movie title, "a man of fire," came to mind.
I hope you're right, that his speech will be followed by others that keep us to the task of restoring our government in the midterm elections.
Bravo Al!
Posted by Mickey at January 16, 2006 05:55 PMEnough with the "calculated strategy." That shit doesn't work.
Hasn't for a while.
Posted by SnarkyShark at January 16, 2006 05:58 PMSteve I am totally onside with your vision here.
Polls clearly indicate the Dems have a large leg up on November with Abramoff and Rove still in the on deck circle.
Dean is playing this perfectly. Focus focus.
BTW anyone catch Bob Barr on CNN tonight supporting Gore?? ..he was magnificent in lending his credibility to a special prosecutor demand re: Fisa .
He also mentioned quite a few other heavy Repub hitters like Sununno and Specter that feel the same way.
We are going to hammer these pricks. I can finally feel it.
People are also making a big mistake assuming that Roberts will be carrying Bush's water too. He could be a rather pleasant surprise, screw Scalito.
It's an ill omen when the apparent decision not to try to filibuster Alito conforms so closely to the "helpful" strategy vomited out for us by the loathsome trolls ("no negativity!", "no message of hope!") who carry the GOP's water here, and are (of course) very concerned about our health at the polls in November.
This is starting to be a tough team to have confidence in. They desperately need to win a game, and I'm now not looking forward to the FISA violation hearings. We better soon start hearing some Democratic demands for a select committee, or better, as Gore called for, a special prosecutor.
Biden, Kohl and Feinstein ain't gonna cut it. I'm not satisfied!
Posted by euzoius at January 16, 2006 06:00 PMI don't see Alito getting on the Supreme court as anything but a terrible loss. Please tell me if i'm wrong. This guy is awful and of all the possible uses of a filibuster this guys fits the bill. He's a liar and he's Bush's "unitairy" puppet. What makes Pelosi think there will be any more battles if we are attacked again and Bush takes up the crooked crown. I'm disheartened to think this will not be an eye gouging fight because that's just what we need. If we lose, fine, but why not make them work their asses off for it? That way, when his ruilings come down against our Citizens as their bound to do, we can at least show how much we were on their side.
Posted by mparker at January 16, 2006 06:15 PMI hate to throw this monkey wrench in but it has got to be said.
Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia, Triad.
Sorry.
Posted by Vinnie at January 16, 2006 06:31 PMYou are correct about the roadblocks to a fair election, Vinnie. It just proves that we have a lot of work to do. We've been complacent far too long!
Posted by pessimist at January 16, 2006 06:41 PMDon't walk away from the fiibuster. There's time, there's building pressure, and it's too important a fight to let a handful of chickenshit Dems and 'moderate' Pugs to sabotage for ass-covering ambitions. Let them know they'll feel the real meaning of pain over this election year (and beyond) if they swipe-card this scumbag onto the SCOTUS.
.
Soto:
There are other issues that are ripe for exploiting GOP malfeasance that don’t require stepping into energy-draining macro-battles like Iraq, areas where voters will make up their own minds this fall without much help from an active effort by our side.
That is eerily similar to Pelosi's recent insistence that Iraq not be made an agenda item for the party in 2006.
I think that's intellectually dishonest. Dean, Murtha, Gore et al: who among the Democrats isn't on the anti-war tip?
Oh, I know: Hillary. She's almost hawkish. Maybe this is all for her benefit.
Posted by Toby Petzold at January 16, 2006 07:08 PMI hate to throw this monkey wrench in but it has got to be said.
Diebold, ES&S, Sequoia, Triad.
Sorry.
Posted by Vinnie at January 16, 2006 06:31 PM
*****
You're goddamn right. That's issue #1 as far as I'm concerned.
Winning elections is ALL THAT MATTERS.
Posted by God Of War at January 16, 2006 07:10 PMAs I have said before, what is the down side of filibuster? The gop calls names? Like what? Just do it, and if it fails, at least they tried. Will the Dems lose any voters? It's January! By November, think of what will have transpired. Filibuster first.
Next, I will repeat, get someone to oppose every republican seat, house or senate. If your district is safe, work on the nearest seat. If your senators (as mine) are both republican, work for the opposition.
Check here for where to work.
Posted by dorita at January 16, 2006 07:12 PMSoto:
There are other issues that are ripe for exploiting GOP malfeasance that don’t require stepping into energy-draining macro-battles like Iraq, areas where voters will make up their own minds this fall without much help from an active effort by our side.
That is eerily similar to Pelosi's recent insistence that Iraq not be made an agenda item for the party in 2006.
I think that's intellectually dishonest. Dean, Murtha, Gore et al: who among the Democrats isn't on the anti-war tip?
Oh, I know: Hillary. She's almost hawkish. Maybe this is all for her benefit.
Posted by Toby Petzold at January 16, 2006 07:08 PM
*****
You might want to start your smear campaign against John Edwards, asshole, because he's just watching and waiting.
Oh, but be forewarned: I'm quite impressed with Mr. Edwards and his prospective ability to turn your party to shreds, so you might want to keep your attacks on the straight and narrow, because if you fucking cockroaches try to swiftboat the man, I'll take it personally, and you can bet your sweet ass that I'll mete out punishment.
Capiche, you twisted little treasonous fuck?
Posted by God Of War at January 16, 2006 07:14 PMToby, don't you have classes tomorrow? Get your little suit together and your cue cards for greeting your new classmates, k?
Read for once, please, more than just one post, one comment.
Posted by dorita at January 16, 2006 07:19 PMFilibuster the motherfucker. I'm sick of getting fucked by my own team.
Posted by Sharon at January 16, 2006 07:33 PM"The Republican Party has been hijacked by the religious fanatics that, in my opinion, aren't a whole lot different than Osama bin Laden and a lot of the other religious nuts around the world," he said. "The challenge is for the rest of us moderate Americans and citizens of the world to put down the fork and spoon, turn off the TV, and participate in the process and try to push back on these radical nuts - and they are nuts."
- Paul Hackett, Democratic candidate for Senate (OH)
Posted by God Of War at January 16, 2006 07:37 PMyeah, that ^
(Sorry emal, cool trick, I had to do it :)
Posted by dorita at January 16, 2006 07:48 PMSteve, your post was right on. I hear from frustrated people sometimes that they hate politics. Well, most people I know hate taking the garbage out, but if we don't get up from the chair and take it out, the house begins to stink. Few years in our nation's history have mattered more in terms of the need for reform than this one. Yeah, there's a lot of useful things to do.
I haven't heard Gore's speech yet but I read it an hour ago. It was brilliant. He gets it and he says it loud and clear.
Democrats in the Senate still need to make their statement even if they don't filibuster. If nothing else, they must stand up for the Constitution. They must stand for our rights and the courage of our nation. I have heard Rep. Murtha several times now and I admire his clear, straight-forward courage; his courage is what matters, it matters more than whether his view on Iraq is exactly the right one.
I can't emphasize enough Gore's point that we have managed to preserve our freedoms and our rights and the checks and balances of our government under worse threats than terrorism. Terrorism is a serious problem but we can face it without secrecy and fear and without eroding our constitution.
You're laying out the case and I think you're right that this is going to be a month by month battle. Karl Rove and his kind of Republicans will be doing everything they can to change the subject and to exploit fear. The subject for Democrats is reform, fidelity to our democracy, and courage.
Posted by Craig at January 16, 2006 08:00 PMA filibuster on Alito is problematic for these reasons:
1) It will take energy and focus off the kinds of "winnable" battles that can and must be taken on in order to get some momentum for the Democrats.
2) I don't think it will work in terms of PR. Alito is not an objectionable figure to enough people; in fact, he might emerge from a filibuster as some kind of "folk hero", as the charges against him will look petty to most people. (They are not "policy wonks", remember that).
3) It puts the Democrats in the public eye as fighting a lost cause in order to draw attention to themselves instead of "doing the work of the people". So, instead of picking up the banner and marching forward, looking like potential "saviors" on pressing issues that people should care about, they will be slinging mud and looking for all the world like "spoilers" and "whiners".
4) Allto is qualified, after all. He may not be "our choice", but that's largely immaterial when it comes to raising substantive objections to his taking a seat at the bench.
So, this is one case where "if it feels good, do it" is just not very helpful advice. Strategy involves making choices as to where to place your chips; reactionary tactics are not really strategy.
He's qualified? Doesn't he approve of the Bush power grab? Isn't that UnAmerican? Wouldn't that disqualify him?
Posted by Sharon at January 16, 2006 08:38 PMGod of War, it's not your threatening and abusive language I find so offensive; it's the fact that you would defend such a cipher of a politcian. What sort of irredeemable dumbass must you be to think that John Edwards deserves even a passing thought?
I am embarrassed for you and disrespect you as a thinker.
Posted by Toby Petzold at January 16, 2006 08:42 PMDorita:
Read for once, please, more than just one post, one comment.
I have read your comments. I have no further response to them.
Posted by Toby Petzold at January 16, 2006 08:45 PM1) It will show that democrats are up for a fight -- unlike the current gop -- just up for the grub and power.
2) "People" are not doing the voting, unfortunately. We people can only to write a letter or two and hope to have an influence. yeah right. Again, most people respect a woman's right to choose, limitations of presidential powers. . .
3)My god, how many names do they have to sling for you not to pick up one? Do you really think it will stop? Fighting democratically will win.
4)What Sharon said.
Terry, you want a whiny party? Follow your own lead. If you want a strong party, get out there.
I have read your comments. I have no further response to them.
All in fun Toby. Don't be such a sissy. It might look bad on UT -- you know title, Vince and all.
Posted by dorita at January 16, 2006 08:59 PM"The Republican Party has been hijacked by the religious fanatics that, in my opinion, aren't a whole lot different than Osama bin Laden and a lot of the other religious nuts around the world," he said. "The challenge is for the rest of us moderate Americans and citizens of the world to put down the fork and spoon, turn off the TV, and participate in the process and try to push back on these radical nuts - and they are nuts."
- Paul Hackett, Democratic candidate for Senate (OH)
****
yeah, what he said !!!!
I second (third ?) that ^
Posted by dorita at January 16, 2006 09:11 PMHope all you chickenhawk, propagandized, sick little fuck GOP boot-lickers read the above post.
Posted by sf at January 16, 2006 09:13 PMAnd we'll start with you, Crappy.
Posted by sf at January 16, 2006 09:19 PMYou guys really need me to keep your focus. Now I see you blathering and fighting among yourselves, and to be honest, its fun to watch.
Go ahead and cannabalize yourself, I'm for Gore, I'm for Hillary, no I'm for Dean. Make your little selves happy now, two years before the campaign even starts.
If it makes you feel good, then keep it up. Gore is irrelevant, Dean is a nutcase, Hillary is too damn shrewd and too damn manipulative and...she wants it too bad,(having put up with Bill all these many years) to let Gore or Dean or anyone take it from her.
If she takes too long her hips will explode, so she must move in 2008.
Besides, this will be the first election since, I guess Truman. Were a sitting incumbent or his vice president was not on the ticket.
Thats right, Cheney who would be an excellent President has already said, no way josea.
Get back to focusing on hating me and not each other.... but as usual your party will implode even with things like Abramhoff (sic) or the like.
carpe, Were those your kids with the baseball bats?
Posted by bbtb at January 16, 2006 09:41 PMAre we really so willing to give up our rights to an unrestricted president? This idea scares me one hell of alot more than the terrorists. If maintaining the freedoms given to us by our founding fathers is not worth fighting for, what is?
Boy are we going to kick ass on the next one. How many times have I heard that one. What if the Dems need to fight to get people to pay attention to the corruption running ramponent in the Republican party, and it doesn't look like it will work, do we delude ourself that it is better to go on to the next issue and the next and the next.
By the way, the latest Zogby poll asks who do you trust in the INTEGRATY category. Results:
Republicans 35%
Democrats 34%
Oh well, according to the current Democratic policy it is time to give up on that one and what was the next issue. No wonder people don't trust us. We won't stand for anything. Filibuster!
Posted by MOBlue at January 16, 2006 10:02 PM"That way, when his ruilings come down against our Citizens as their bound to do, we can at least show how much we were on their side."
Mparker, I agree. The moment any Democrat says anything against Alito after being crowned on the SCOTUS, we will be forced to eat our words by the Republicans.
Posted by Judith at January 16, 2006 10:06 PMcarpe, Were those your kids with the baseball bats?
Posted by bbtb at January 16, 2006 09:41 PM
*****
No, that wouldn't be the republican way. They would pay somebody else's kids to wield the baseball bats. Just like they get somebody else's kid to fight their wars.
Ah, Steve. You're saying that the carrot dangling in front of the Democrats is always "the next battle." Gotcha.
Funny, though. The donkey always chases but never gets to eat the carrot.
Posted by muckdog at January 16, 2006 10:37 PMBesides, this will be the first election since, I guess Truman. Were a sitting incumbent or his vice president was not on the ticket.
Posted by carpediem at January 16, 2006 09:32 PM
****
Once again, Carpe displays his complete lack of knowledge and yes, facts. Humphrey, 1968, Bush 1988.
I'm sorry I forgot Gore 2000.
Posted by sf at January 16, 2006 11:00 PMYes, Terry "spoilers" and "whiners" as say opposed to say unprincipled pathetic roll-over losers? Yeah that really bothers me.
And I "third" what Sharon says about Alito's qualifications. So his demeanor and temperament at the nomination hearings wasn't like Bork but it certainly doesn't mean his judicial philosophy and belief system isn't like Bork's. It was all an act Terry, it's his judicial record (and he has quite an extensive one) that is scary and out of the mainstream ...but hey he looked good at the hearings.
Posted by emal at January 17, 2006 04:33 AMI am embarrassed for you and disrespect you as a thinker.
This from a guy who has said many times that liberals are traitors!
GOW = Patriot
Good enough in my book. Our Founding Fathers told us we would have to fight for our democracy. GOWs heart is in the right place.
Posted by phidipides at January 17, 2006 05:26 AMGod of War, it's not your threatening and abusive language I find so offensive; it's the fact that you would defend such a cipher of a politcian. What sort of irredeemable dumbass must you be to think that John Edwards deserves even a passing thought?
I am embarrassed for you and disrespect you as a thinker.
Posted by Toby Petzold at January 16, 2006 08:42 PM
*****
This from a BUSH defender! Oh sweet projection!
Your fear of Edwards is palpable, and it is justified.
He and others like him (Hackett, for example) will fucking ruin your corrupt, contemptible, traitorous party.
Posted by God Of War at January 17, 2006 05:50 AMDear Sf, just FYI, 1952 is the last time an election was had in which the incumbent president or his vice president didn't run.
Please re-read my post. In 1988 Vice President Bush won, in 2000 Vice President Gore lost.
this election will have NO INCUMBENT since 1952 Stevenson v. Eisenhower, neither were incumbents neither were vice presidents.
gees....
now as to GOW love affair with cutey pie Edwards. He spent one term in the senate. Was going to lose in his re-election bid. Has never been an executive.
Point of order:
Senatators are rarely ever elected President, without a stop at being a Governor etc. The last was John Kennedy and I don't remember the last one before him.
Kennedy was like Edwards, a pretty boy. Without his looks. . . well, there is no substance...then again, that may be what you are looking for.
The irony of BUSH! supporters slamming Edwards for "lacking substance" is hilarious.
Yes, Edwards is better looking than every one of our resident trolls, a fact which obviously causes them consternation. He's also far more accomplished than any of them could ever dream of being...yet another cause for blatant jealousy.
You Rovefuckers mean to tell me that a serial failure, chimpy-looking, language-butchering fool like W is worthy of POTUS, but an accomplished, eloquent, clear-headed, and, yes, damn good-looking dude like Edwards isn't?
Yeah. Sure. Keep telling yourselves that. The rest of America won't agree.
Oh, and btw...the "Two Americas" speech...that was just dead on accurate. Anyone with that clarity of thought and message deserves to lead this nation.
Which leads to my parting shot, trolls: Of the two Americas in which we live, you're all in the one BushCorp abuses and exploits. Maybe you Rovefuckers enjoy your unvaselined ass ramming from BushCorp, but the rest of us aren't into such masochistic adventures.
Posted by God Of War at January 17, 2006 07:50 AMCarpe Diem, to be fair here, what substance exactly did Bush have when he came into the White House? And please, don't tell me about his time in Texas, a weak-governor state that is run by the Lt. Governor. In Bush's case, Bob Bullock ran things and Bush got to sign bills and rake in campaign cash.
Edwards will have an advantage over other senators in that he won't be encumbered by holding the office and being tied down to his chair in the Capitol facing votes, like Kerry and he were in 2004. Edwards will also have a better time of it in 2008 on the war issue because he pleased the base by walking away from his war vote, which he wasn't able to do in 2004. It will be a cleaner break that the sloppy one Kerry tried to make in 2004.
An Edwards/Warner or Edwards/Clark ticket in 2008 will give the GOP red-state problems they haven't had since the 1990's. I know you won't agree, but that's the scenario that may play out.
Posted by Steve Soto at January 17, 2006 08:21 AMAn Edwards/Warner or Edwards/Clark ticket in 2008 will give the GOP red-state problems they haven't had since the 1990's. I know you won't agree, but that's the scenario that may play out.
Posted by Steve Soto at January 17, 2006 08:21 AM
*****
Bingo.
I spend a lot of time in the great Rocky Mountain west, and they like Edwards out there too.
Posted by God Of War at January 17, 2006 08:37 AMThe one issue the Democrats have to address in 2008 is security. It's the one area the GOP always beats them at. An Edwards/Clark ticket would solve that problem and run strong nationwide, especially in the red states.
Posted by rlp at January 17, 2006 10:10 AMEdwards/Clark I could live with. I'm not yet sold on Warner - but then I'm not 'souled out' on him either.
Posted by pessimist at January 17, 2006 12:32 PMIt is really a shame that during "hero" Al's big four months in Saigon, one of his type writers or reems of paper didn't fall and take him out! The nation wouldn't even have missed him! SEMPER FI!
Posted by GNY/Sgt Salley Ret at January 17, 2006 08:12 PMal gore did his duty and went to viet nam..how can you belittle that?..your commander in chief was absent the last two years of his national guard obligation..unaccounted for..he took someone else's place and shirked his duty..was out snorting coke and drinking and getting laid...i don't get you people..honest to god i don't..you don't make any sense...it's kind of crazy
Posted by dennis at January 18, 2006 04:03 AM