I agree, and talk about a self fufilling prophecy among the entrenched democratic establishment and consultants...Anyway, did anyone see Wolf's show yesterday where Bill Schneider has a political play of the week...Feingold's censure proposal was it! He pretty much summed it up that standing up for your principles is still the best politics....and awarded Feingold the honor. Too bad democrats like Cliff can't think outside the box yet and realize that yet.
Reminds of that commenter here that often says something to the effect, stand up for your principles and the politics will follow. Does anyone remember who often said that here, was it GOW?
Posted by emal at March 18, 2006 02:36 PMr, y hv rtchtd yr lvl f bstrctn yt hghr, s ths pc shws. Yr ‘ntrnlztn’ pnt s vld; bt wht nw ntrnlzd vl wll y rplc th sspct n? Vslz th ncnt pgn ntn f rltvsm: thr s n ‘trth;’ r, ‘wht s trth?’ Ths rltvstc phlsphy f flshnss wld hv s blv tht trth s rltv t th scl rltns t s mbddd wthn. r, wrs, thr r hndrds, thsnds f ‘trths.’ Th ndrlyng fndtn s cly: rltvsm s chs. Th prfssnl nthrplgsts lv t mbrc rltvsm snc t nt nly dns th xstnc f ny n trth, bt lvls th cltrl plyng fld thrby flng th ntllctl cnfsn csd by mllns f ‘ntrnlztns,’ r ‘bjctfctns,’ bt ltmtly dfs thmslvs, r ‘scnc.’ nd hr w nt th vry rt f th ‘mltry-ndstrl cmplx:’ r Gdlss ‘scntsts’ tht nsst tht thr ntrprttv vws f th fcts r th trth n thr Brv Nw Wrld f th rlgn clld ‘Sclr Hmnsm.’
t ws th n-rltvsm ntn, h s flly mbrcd by r ‘ntllctls’ drng th pst 100 yrs, tht systmtclly tr prt r scl nstttns thrby strngthnng th prsnt rlty f chs tht smply rplcs n vl wth nthr; sm vn blv th fllcy tht w rplc n vl wth n lssr vl. ltmtly, vl s vl; flth s flth.
Th nly hp f pltcs, nd mnknd tslf, s th s shmfl nd stgmtzd Bbl. Yt m ttlly cnvncd, ftr yrs f stdyng th Bbl’s cntnts, t s nt nly th nsgn fr hmn bhvr, th nly pssbl hp fr mnknd. Hstry, 13,000 yrs f hstry, s rplt wth n thm: th nnt vl f hmn ntr cnstntly rplcng tslf s vpr shds t’s skn wth nw skn, tslf dstnd fr crrptn.
Ths lds m t pnt t tht th nly wy t cntr th vl n th WH nd n th Hll s tht n f th pltcl prts, r grss rts ffrt, mst qstn ll f r ‘ntrnlztns,’ nd ths nclds ths tht w, h, s chrsh. t s crtcl tht th stndrd f msrmnt b th Bbl, nd nthng ls. W wll nt lk mch r wht w wld lrn, bt thn, w hvn’t lkd mch frm th pst 13,000 yrs.
Cld n f r psd-’Chrstn’ chrchs b r ldr? Hrdly, hvn’t sn n trnd ‘thlgn’ hv shrd f Bblcl ndrstndng stll lv tdy. Yt, th ppl f Nnvh, f ll plcs, dd ndd rcv Jhvh’s rpntnc, s w lrn n th Bk f Jnh. Nw, sk y, hv y vr rd nythng s rdcl, yt s qnt, s my bv rcp t bttr th wrld? Ys? nd wld tht b smthng lk rplcng th flth wth nw gnrtn f flth? sspct s.
Do the right thing? Now there's a novel idea. Seems that Feingold is one of only a few principaled Democrats who hasn't sold his soul to the devil. Since when did we have to consult with opinion makers about standing up and doing the right thing? Since when was censure or impeachment decided based on whether or not it was the politically astute thing to do? Go ahead and "fall in line" Democrats. Don't stand up for what you believe, but don't expect my vote in 2008 either.
"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams
"What if we had a scenario wherein every Democrat that disapproves of Bush (~the mid 80% range) supported censure? For example, if 85% of Democrats supported censure and only 11% opposed (rest D/N)..."
If wishes were horses, beggers would ride.
Posted by Bagley at March 18, 2006 03:04 PMScout, I would like to read your posts, but they are so long that I don't take the time. Perhaps if you could condense them a bit, it would be easier for all of us to read and quicker too. I am interested in what you have to say.
Posted by Judith at March 18, 2006 03:09 PMshould read "don't expect my vote in 2006."
Posted by Judith at March 18, 2006 03:18 PMHow are the sheeple supposed to know what is the best thing to do? It's not just the DLC Dems who fear that trying to do anything now is politically risky. It's totally the principled and right thing to do, but what effect could it have come Nov?
Clinton was able to survive impeachment because once he was attacked his base fell in line to support him. Much of Bush's base has wandered away since the 04 election but this move for censure conceivably could move voters back the wrong way. Kind of like someone defending a family member even though you know s/he is the one in the wrong (a very common red-state trait btw).
Censure now might weaken the possibility of getting the votes needed for some real oversight if the Dems could gain a majority or close to it come Nov. For voter turnout's sake to that end the Dem leadership is counting on voters staying pissed-off so why would they want to even try to provide any vent for it right now?
All that said, Feingold is the real deal. We need to clone us a whole party of Feingolds.
For his censure move to work it needs to be framed as a vote for Bush, or a vote against Bush, which is what it is really. They will either be voting to give Bush the blank check of Augustus, ie: more power than the title granted to him, or they will vote to bring him back down to earth.
Posted by sans-culotte at March 18, 2006 03:25 PMLeave politics to idiots like Lieberman?????
Posted by TIKI AL at March 18, 2006 03:52 PMTIKI AL,
You said: "Leave politics to idiots like Lieberman?????"
That's not what I meant. I said leave the political calculations to politicians and express your views purely based on the merits of the issue (right or wrong from a moral or legal or ethical standpoint). You can still criticize politicians whose politics stink - but I am suggesting that ordinary citizens refrain from making decisions about the appropriateness of behaviors or actions based on what is "politically astute".
Posted by eriposte at March 18, 2006 04:49 PMRight or wrong should never be sacrificed on the alter of "what ifs." What if the Democrats don't gain the majority in November? Personally, I think that Democrats would gain some respect from Americans if they did support Censure, but I am usually wrong. A Censured President going into the 2006 elections can't be exactly good for the Republicans. It would all hinge on the Democrat's ability to frame the Censure resolution. In the best of worlds, the question of Censuring should be presented so that to vote against it would be political suicide. Personally, I'm tired of inaction due to fear.
E. J. Dionne Jr. writes in his Washington Post opinion column:
"For two decades, Republicans have used their idealists, their ideologues and their loudmouths to push the boundaries of discussion to the right. In the best of all worlds, Feingold's strong stand would redefine what's 'moderate' and make clear that those challenging the legality of the wiretapping are neither extreme nor soft on terrorism."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/2005/04/11/LI2005041100879.html
Posted by Judith at March 18, 2006 05:37 PMJdth, thnks fr th fdbck; m srprsd tht nyn thr thn th hsts wr ntrstd n my cmmntry fdbcks. Thr r tw rsns njy ths st, strtng wth th fct tht th wrtng hsts wrk hrd. rspct thr wrk nd shw my rspct by ffrng hnst fdbck, vn f thy d nt wnt t hr wht hv t wrt. Th scnd rsn fr my st vst s tht rd sm xcllnt nsghts tht r ftn lght yrs hd f th ‘prfssnl’ st cmmntrs; nd ccsnlly s sm sld hmn ntrctn tht rmnds m f tht lttl stn f ‘gdnss’ tht s smwhr n ll f s.
Bth th lngth nd lvl f bstrctn r prblm wth my cmmnts. ftn dn’t hv th blty t rspnd bcs cn’t fgr t hw t wrt pst tht my gnrt bt thr pgs t cvr vr n pnt, lvng m svrl pnts ncvrd whn ’m lrdy t lng.
Tw mr tms: sts sch s ths r smlr t nfrml grdt smnrs n tht th hst/nstrctr gnrts th thght frmwrk, th thght ‘mnd-st,’ nd lts t fly. S whn sm fl lk m cms lng, wll, t’s nt sy t tckl th sprstrctr f th hst gmnt wtht hmmrng n th sppstnl sb-strctr. nfrtntly, ths gnrts t lst pg r tw. Th bty f pstng s tht flks n plyfl md cn smply scrll pst wrtr/nrds lk myslf. Ths s why lwys ddrss my pst t th hst; gvs th plyfl pstrs hd’s p t scrll. S thnks fr th fdbck nd ’ll cntn t wrk n th lngth.
Judith, thanks for the feedback; I am surprised that anyone other than the hosts were interested in my commentary feedbacks. There are two reasons I enjoy this site, starting with the fact that the writing hosts work hard. I respect their work and show my respect by offering honest feedback, even if they do not want to hear what I have to write. The second reason for my site visit is that I read some excellent insights that are often light years ahead of the ‘professional’ site commentaries; and I occasionally see some solid human interaction that reminds me of that little stain of ‘goodness’ that is somewhere in all of us.
Both the length and level of abstraction are a problem with my comments. Often I don’t have the ability to respond because I can’t figure out how to write a post that may generate about three pages to cover over one point, leaving me several points uncovered when I’m already too long.
Two more items: sites such as this are similar to informal graduate seminars in that the host/instructor generates the thought framework, the thought ‘mind-set,’ and lets it fly. So when some fool like me comes along, well, it’s not easy to tackle the superstructure of the host augment without hammering on the suppositional sub-structure. Unfortunately, this generates at least a page or two. The beauty of posting is that folks in a playful mood can simply scroll past writer/nerds like myself. This is why I always address my post to the host; gives the playful posters a head’s up to scroll. So thanks for the feedback and I’ll continue to work on the length.
Posted by scout at March 19, 2006 12:34 PM
Scout
I too enjoy reading posts. Could you condense yours a little so that the main thought comes through, say maybe two sentences?
Scout, I think you present some very interesting thoughts, and I am sure I am not the only one who feels that way. Thanks for your feedback.
Yes, this is a great site and I feel very honored to post here. I do not have the intelligence nor the degrees that some here seem to have, but no one has ever suggested that I was not an equal (other than a troll or two saying I was stupid, and that doesn't count). LOL
"I read some excellent insights that are often light years ahead of the ‘professional’ site commentaries; and I occasionally see some solid human interaction that reminds me of that little stain of ‘goodness’ that is somewhere in all of us." I could not have said it any better Scout. Yes, after so long I guess people here become like family and a genuine caring develops (you know, that bleeding heart stuff we liberals do).
By-the-way, the reason Pigeon6 wants only two sentences is because that is all he can retain in his limited mind.