Still On Vacation… BUT…

December 28, 2006

I’m still officially on vacation until January 2nd but thought I would pop in and write a disorganized quickie…

Quick question concerning one of my favorite subjects. Do you think someone should come up with some kind of “Razzie” type award for “progressive” bloggers who just get it wrong? Case in point: Over at OpEd News, Stephen Lendman writes…

… with the president’s approval rating plunging as low as 28% in some independent polls and a growing number of people in the country demanding his impeachment and removal from office.

It’s not likely from the new Democrat-led Congress arriving in January, as their DLC leadership took it off the table…

May I remind Lenderman that Nancy Pelosi, NOT the DLC, uttered the famous line about impeachment being off the table? So you have to wonder if he intentionally lied or if he drinks from the Kos-Sirota-Huffington Kool-aid fountain of “progressive” propoganda.

Lately “OpEd News,” a contradiction in terms if there ever was one, has become obsessed with the Democratic Leadership Council. But if there really is so much negative to say about the DLC, as “progressive” bloggers believe, why do they have to make stuff up?

But just in case someone from OpEd News is reading this, I’ll take you and my 10 readers on a trip down memory lane…

Back when OpEd News ran an article titled “The DLC Sucks,” the DLC ran an article titled “Fulfilling The American Dream.”

While OpEd News was admonishing their readers to “Shun the DLC Shills,” the DLC was advising the world to “Divest From Sudan to Help Darfur.”

OpEd News provided us with a wonderfulling inspiring article called “DLC Golden Boy Casey French Kisses Alito” and the DLC presented us with a piece called “Break the Stalemate on Stem-Cell Research.”

Now any serious person with a political mindset would prefer the DLC’s articles over the juvenile “DLC sucks” ramblings of OpEd News. But, of course, you have to understand the target audience of OpEd News…

Quotes! We Got Quotes!

Deep DenialRob Kall at OpEd News warns Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid about “centrist bullshit.” He believes they’re just acting “strategically,” perhaps just waiting for the right time to usher in the glorious “progressive” revolution.

Make Up Your Mind… “The preferred candidate (for President) of Al From and the DLC is Hillary Clinton…” “Al From, famously from the DLC group of insiders has, been urging (Michael) Bloomberg to run (for President) as an indie.”

I wanna Raq! “While America’s Iraq War will soon eclipse the length of World War II, it is becoming increasingly apparent that the issue that dominated the 2004 and 2006 elections may well also be the one on which the 2008 presidential campaign turns…” “The Iraq war will certainly be a greatly diminished issue by (2008), and the other war – the Culture War – will return to prominence.”


The Stereotypical Double Agent

December 15, 2006

I’m not a leftwinger (I don’t even play one on TV!), but I do know enough of them to know how they think. I’ve always found it amusing and and sometimes even interesting how they can take two or more seemingly coincidental components and piece them together into one nice and tidy conspiracy theory. Hey, I’m not knocking the thought process! It does take some creative juice to develop these theories as quickly as they do.

It isn’t often I drink from that well but something hit me like a ton of bricks recently while reading Arianna Huffington’s latest hit piece (one of many) on Hillary Clinton. It seems Ms. Huffington has some personal issue with Mrs. Clinton that extends beyond mere political differences. Perhaps they both showed up in the same $10,000 dress at some black tie function. Who knows? But Huffington seems to be obsessed with Clinton (actually, both Clintons) and spends grand amounts of energy tearing them down in op-ed after op-ed. And she’s supposed to be on their side. Supposed to be…

But it occurs to me that before Arianna supposedly “saw the light” and became a liberal, she was a hardcore conservative. Her late husband, Republican Michael Huffington, was a former candidate for the US Senate in the early 90s and Arianna worked tirelessly on his campaign as dutiful political spouses are prone to do. But from there, she was employed by Newt Gingrich during the Clinton witch hunts, becoming senior fellow at his conservative think tank the Progress and Freedom Foundation. She once even held a $50,000 a plate fundraiser for Newt! Do you think she was involved in any way with digging up dirt on the Clintons for Gingrich?

Then, and here comes the ribbon to neatly tie up the loose ends on my conspiracy theory, Huffington became quite enamoured with John McCain in the 2000 presidential race and wrote of her affections often. Who do you think she supported during the primaries that year? My money isn’t on Al Gore!

Now, stay with me, we have a politically opportunistic social climber in Arianna Huffington with a record of actually raising money for those who tried to depose a sitting Democratic president (showing a history of disdain for the Clintons), who supported John McCain in 2000 (the likely 2008 Republican nominee for President), and who now seems obsessed with taking down McCain’s likely Democratic opponent. You guessed it – Hillary Clinton!

And Arianna is the stereotypical cold war double agent – a sexy female with a thick Eastern European accent!  Not too bad for my first conspiracy theory, eh?  But I would probably hit “delete” on this blog post if what I’ve written didn’t ring so damn true.

In closing, some will say that Arianna Huffington had a transformation from rightwinger to leftwinger.  To that I say there is no one as zealous as a convert.  She had already shown the propensity for changing her political mind seemingly on a whim.  How long before she grows tired of the current offerings from the left and leaps across the aisle into the open arms of the GOP once again?


“Progressives” Want It Both Ways

December 13, 2006

This is ponderous. For six years Karl Rove outmanuevered and outsmarted Democrats, it seems, at every turn. “Where is OUR Karl Rove?” Voices would ask from the left. “We need someone not afraid to play dirty!”

Well, it appears our guy is Rahm Emanuel, outgoing chief of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and widely credited with putting the House back into Democratic hands. But we’ve covered that before, have we not?

Emanuel has been called by some “Bill Clinton’s Karl Rove.” During the President’s 1992 campaign, according to Wikipedia, Emanuel insisted that Clinton schedule a lot of time for fundraising rather than campaigning in New Hampshire. After much dispute within the campaign about the issue, Clinton eventually agreed, embarking on an aggressive fundraising campaign across the nation. The fundraising paid off later, providing the campaign a vital buffer to keep buying television time as attacks on character issues threatened to swamp Clinton’s campaign during the New Hampshire primary. Clinton’s most serious primary rival, Paul Tsongas, later withdrew, citing a lack of campaign funds.

Emanuel reportedly told British Prime Minister Tony Blair, “This is important. Don’t fuck it up,” prior to Blair appearing in public with Clinton for the first time after the Lewinsky scandal emerged.

Earlier this year, Congressman Emanuel stood on the floor of Congess and condemned conservative writer Ann Coulter for slandering the widows of 9/11. He said, and I quote: “The hate she spews is the same kind of hatred we’re battling in the war on terror. As a country of thought and reason, I urge all of us to reject it. I must ask my colleagues on the other side of the aisle: Does Ann Coulter speak for you when she suggests poisoning Supreme Court Justices or slanders the 9/11 widows? If not, speak now. Your silence allows her to be your spokesman.”

Yes, Emanuel is the “fighter” we’ve longed for. He’s not afraid to do or say what it a takes to win. Yet now that we have our Karl Rove, there are whines from the left that he isn’t fit to lead. Why? Because he may have done something we all secretly were hoping he did back before we won. He may have been behind the Mark Foley e-mail leaks.

Oh, the horror to think Emanuel may have engineered the whole sordid thing. He may have stretched the truth a wee bit on national TV. He may have known about Foley back in 2005 (back when the Foley story was originally shopped to the TV Networks, remember?) and he may have timed it to come out mere weeks before the election to further expose the stink of the Republican congress.

To all my “progressive” lurkers – what do you think would have happened if the proverbial shoe was on the other foot? Do you think Republicans would have sat on that information about a Democratic congressman? It would have been on the CNN and FOX news tickers 24-7, Drudge would have been blaming Bill Clinton, and Democrats would once again be wringing their hands in frustration over how the GOP beat us once again on the “family values” plank.

So take your high horse riding “more progressive than thou” act somewhere else. This was one the most important elections of our lives. The people charged with winning it did what had to be done. If you can’t stomach the reality of politics and of the enemy we face, the game isn’t for you.


Darfur

December 12, 2006

I want you to watch this video before you read the rest of this post. Don’t worry. I’ll wait…

Sad? Yes. I’ve been a proponent of intervention in Darfur for some time now. Military intervention. If I had my way, those committing the atrocities there would be wiped out by the full force of the United States military. People talk about leaving Iraq and redeploying some of the troops elsewhere? Put Darfur on that list.

It occurred to me last night, though, that the issue doesn’t get a lot of play in the “progressive” blogosphere and online communities. Threads on the topic often sink like a stone on such “progressive” outlets like Democratic Underground. And while the topic does get some play on liberal blogs like DailyKos, MyDD, and Firedoglake, it is conspicuously missing as a permanent reminder on their front pages.

But to be fair, the subject is also largely ignored by most stations on the left. Like the progressive blogs, It does get attention from moderate/centrist outlets but isn’t treated as paramount. With the exception of the DLC and Wes Clark, no mainstream Democrats have given Darfur the attention it deserves. This is very disturbing because the genocide there should be a liberal cause. It should be a rallying cry among Democrats of all stripes. If our military has had one single noble moment in time, it was the defeat of Nazi Germany. Whatever happened to the post-Holocaust mantra “Never Again?”

The time for hemming and hawing is over. The time for action is now. If the blogosphere wants an issue to unite behind, this is it. Let’s make a real difference. I challenge all bloggers to do so.


Revisting Hillary Clinton’s “Conservative” Record…

December 11, 2006

I guess you could say this post is by my first guest blogger.  My online friend and frequent commenter here, SaveElmer, took a few fringe leftwingers to task last week on the charge that Hillary Clinton is a “conservative.”

Surely among our friends and foes advocating for their causes, we should be able to see the true conservative that Hillary is emerge…

Lets start with

NARAL… which is “committed to advancing our shared values. We are committed to protecting the right to choose and electing candidates who will promote policies to prevent unintended pregnancy. We are going on the offensive, reshaping the terms of the debate, and bridging the false divides that are meant to keep us from progress on reproductive health. ”

In 2005 NARAL gave Hillary Clinton a 100 rating. So when you hear the Hillaryphobes complain the she has shifted her position on abortion, you know it isn’t true

Next

The NAACP…whose mission is to “ensure ure the political, educational, social, and economic equality of rights of all persons and to eliminate racial hatred and racial discrimination. ”

The NAACP gave Hillary CLinton a 95 rating in 2005. But if you want to see how folks in the NAACP view Hillary Clinton, here is a video of her appearance at their convention this last July.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1Yst-JL8gY

Along with the NAACP the Leadership Council on Civil Rights, which was organized “by three giants of the civil rights movement: A. Philip Randolph, founder of the Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters; Roy Wilkins, Executive Secretary of the NAACP; and Arnold Aronson, a leader of the National Jewish Community Relations Advisory Council…is the nation’s premier civil rights coalition, and has coordinated the national legislative campaign on behalf of every major civil rights law since 1957. ”

The Leadership Council on Civil Rights gave Hillary Clinton a 100 rating

How about the National Education Association (NEA), one of the premier eucational advocacy groups, and longtime member of the Democratic coalition…how do you suppose they feel about Hillary CLinton

Yep you guessed it, another 100 rating

Maybe Hillary’s conservative bona fides will show up in her environmental record…

How about the League of Conservation Voters…”the independent political voice for the environment. To secure the environmental future of our planet, LCV’s mission is to advocate for sound environmental policies and to elect pro-environmental candidates who will adopt and implement such policies. ”

Guess we will have to look elsewhere, they like Hillary 95% of the time.

Hmmm…well surely we will be able to see her true conservatism emerge with consumer groups, because we all know she is a corporate lackey…or “corporatist” as some here like to call her…surely U.S. PIRG, which is the “federation of state Public Interest Research Groups (PIRGs), that takes on powerful interests on behalf of the American public, working to win concrete results for our health and our well-being”…would be concerned about her record.

Damn…they liked her 100% of the time in 2005 too…

Well clearly Hillary’s rock star status, money, and name recognition account for her being able to bamboozle all of these organizations…

But…surely our enemies on the right can see her value as a conservative…

Let’s take a look.

How about the National Right to Life Committee, I mean if any organization would cheer the shift in position so many here claim she has made, they would…let’s see if they saw it…

Hmm weird…they give her a big fat 0

Ok that was only one…maybe they weren’t paying attention

How about the U.S Chamber of Commerce…I mean if she is the huge friend of corporate American so many here claim, surely the Chamber would see it…

Are you kidding me…they only gave her a 35 pro business rating…hmmm…well that is higher than some of the other conservative groups…maybe they are beginning to see the light…but just to be sure…lets see how they rate other Democrats…particularly those we know to be solidly liberal..

Ok this is weird…Henry Waxman gets a 38…and Barack Obama gets a 39…what is going on?  (oh wait, I forgot, Obama is a corporate sellout too…phew)…still that Waxman number…lets check a couple more…Jim McGovern a 35Barney Frank a 33John Conyers a 35…oh man even Bernie Sanders…you know SOCIALIST Bernie Sanders pulled in a 33…stop I can’t take it anymore…!

Hillary that conservative evil genius has them ALL fooled….

Ok..one more…surely the John Birch Society can be counted on to recognize one of their own…ok they give Hillary a 21…not bad it would seem…still after getting burned by the U.S. Chamber we had better check…

It can’t be…it just can’t be…Dennis Kucinich a conservative? Well probably not…but still a 37 rating from the John Birch society…

Well I guess conservative Hillary is no where to be found here at least…I guess we will have to keep relying on Liberal conventional wisdom that she is indeed one of them…damn, I thought we had her!!!

Of course, the protests to this piece centered on Clinton’s stance on the Iraq war – from the very people who claim not to be one issue voters.


Who Are The Most Powerful Coalitions In Congress? Bush Requests Meeting With DLC, Blue Dogs

December 6, 2006

According to The Hill, President Bush has invited leaders of the conservative Blue Dog and New Democrat coalitions to the White House Friday to discuss areas of “mutual cooperation” in the words of one Democratic Congressional aide.The outreach comes at a time when Bush’s image on Capitol Hill and around the country has taken a serious beating. The meeting is scheduled just two days after the Iraq Study Group is scheduled to release its findings and one day after the Senate Armed Services Committee plans to hold hearings on them.

This is on the heels of several prominant right of center and conservative columnists calling on the GOP to create their own version of the Democratic Leadership Council.   You may also recall last week Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute said the Blue Dogs “hold the balance of power” for the Democratic agenda and political analyst Charlie Cook said a prominent Republican told him that if House Republicans want to remain relevant, “they would take their cues not from the White House” but from the Blue Dogs.

Waiting for the netroots fallout… If you see it first, let me know!


“Progressive” Magazine: “The Deaniacs may caterwaul, but I give Emanuel full and unconditional credit for the 2006 Democratic ‘thumping.'”

December 6, 2006

Writing for In These Times, a politically progressive monthly magazine of news and opinion created by life-long socialist James Weinstein, Laura Washington explains how the Democrats have seized the middle ground and ushered in a “Second Clinton Ascendancy.”

On a post-election edition of PBS’s “The News Hour with Jim Lehrer,” presidential historian Richard Norton Smith told Lehrer: “The Democrats clearly have an opportunity to demonstrate that they’re the Bill Clinton party. You know, historically, I think the real winner this week is Bill Clinton.”

Smith, a scholar in residence at George Mason University, argued that in recent years “we saw the Democrats veer off” to the wilderness of the left, much to the delight of the Bushies. But the 2006 election sweep, according to Smith, gives the Democrats “an opportunity, particularly with a new crop of moderate and relative conservatives, to reclaim plausibly the middle of the road. And if they succeed at that, I’m telling you, Bill Clinton looks like a prophet with honor.”

Got it. When I noted Smith’s point to my leftie friends, they all had to agree, though grudgingly.

So let’s acknowledge this Second Clinton Ascendancy…

She goes on to express her opinion on how the Democratic primaries may pan out, declaring it will be a race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. What I find most interesting about her piece, though, is how she labels the Democratic left in regards to Obama.

Listen beneath the barrage of adoring arias in the national media and you’ll detect grumblings from the Democratic left… Still, I predict that by 2008, the whiners will be vanquished.

Later in the piece is perhaps the passage “progressives” will find the most difficult to stomach.

Take Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), who headed the Democratic Campaign Congressional Committee. The Deaniacs may caterwaul, but I give Emanuel full and unconditional credit for the 2006 Democratic “thumping.”

So do I.