The Washington Weenies vs. Peter Daou
… I was traveling the cable dial this afternoon where
I came upon a panel on CNBC's Kudlow & Company just as Lanny Davis, his
insipid, ingratiating grin firmly in place, was saying that he hoped Democrats
wouldn't “politicize” the Jack Abramoff situation but simply let
the facts of the case emerge.This is the sort of idiot we're inflicted with, the
perfect representative of the Beltway Democrat who cautions against politicizing
anything remotely political for fear it might give David Broder a spot of
indigestion. Imagine what the Newt Gingrich of the early nineties would have
done if he had had something like this handed to him on a platter–he wouldn't
have sent it back to the kitchen. He would have worked it for everything it
was worth, and more. But Beltway weenies are too timid and prissy to exploit
a golden opportunity. Everyone knows the Abramoff scandal has “Republican”
stencilled on every side of it and if you won't/can't use it to jump all over
the Republican Party and the DeLay machine, what the hell are you even doing
in the Democratic Party? As more details surface, the Abramoff cesspool is
going to make the K-Street crowd and their Republicans on retainer look even
worse than they do now, and here's Davis waving the white cocktail napkin
of surrender and urging preemptive pullback. … …
Amen and then some.
Yes, Democrats, we have a problem, but it isn't all them.
Yesterday on “Hardball,” Tennessee Congressman Harold
Ford was interviewed at the very end of the show. What I heard was the most
depressing monologue of mush I'd ever listened to come out of Ford's mouth.
A portion of the transcript is offered below. Mind you, you'll need a stiff drink to wash it down.
REP. HAROLD FORD (D), TENNESSEE:
Progress is being made on both fronts. We‘re at a crossroads in both
places with similar themes. Improved security and better infrastructure and
services are needed. I think there is a wide belief in this country that the
war in Afghanistan is over. It‘s not. We‘ve made great progress
there. General Eikenberry and the team are doing a great job. But as Paul
Bremer indicated in his most recent book, his “Year in Iraq,”
there was a moment when he asked Rumsfeld and the president for more troops
to crush the insurgency in Iraq, and they refused it.I think we may be faced with a similar moment in Afghanistan.
Although the insurgency is small, it is not standing in the way of progress,
if it grows—and we look six months from now and wonder why we didn‘t
crush it—we could find ourselves with similar problems as we
do in Iraq. I hope we don‘t abandon that effort too soon.
And as I said to President Bush in a letter
today, don‘t withdraw prematurely. I would hate for another generation
of kids to have to go back over there 10 years from now or 15 years from now
because we didn‘t finish the job.And finally, we need a new oil plan in this country.
No troop in the United States, no kid, no father, no momma should ever have
to go back to the Middle East to protect our oil interests or our insatiable
appetite for energy.
FORD: If the Shias don‘t make
the Sunnis feel a big part or believe that the Sunnis have a future and that
their kids have aspirations and dreams that can be realized in Iraq, we‘ll
have that problem on our hands, which is why Democrats and Republicans,
our message has to be to the president, don‘t withdraw prematurely.
That doesn‘t mean we can‘t draw down our troop forces eventually,
but don‘t take away from these people the tools that we‘re providing
in Iraq, to help them govern themselves. It‘s critical now and I think,
frankly, it‘s critical five or 10 years down the road.
This is deeply depressing on so many levels. But we all know what
depression actually is: anger turned inward and a lot of us are angry right
now.
This brings me to the next phase of this unfolding Democratic
drama. If you haven't already read Peter
Daou's analysis of the them – us – them “triangle”
debate, please do. It is also up on Huffington,
which I excerpt below. It all ties in to our troubles.
… Forming a triangle of blogs,
media, and the political establishment is an essential step … Simply put,
without the participation of the media and the political establishment, the
netroots alone cannot generate the critical mass necessary to alter or create
conventional wisdom.”–big snip–
Which brings me to the Alito hearings,
a perfect instance for the left's triangle to change conventional wisdom,
to shape public opinion. But rather than a Democratic triumph, the Alito hearings
have thrown the dichotomy between the netroots and the Democratic leadership
into even starker relief, illustrating the profound dysfunction of the left’s
triangle. As well, the depth and breadth of media complicity and the obliviousness
of so many Democrats to it, is alarming. From the choreography of Specter
and Alito creating the “open mind on abortion” soundbite that media
outlets dutifully ran with, to the Sen. Graham/Mrs. Alito tear-fest
that should have prompted Dems to slam the Republicans for bringing the Judge's
wife to tears but instead turned into another Dem-bashing occasion,
to the complete failure of the Democratic leadership to create the appropriate
tone of outrage (in soundbite form), the chronic breakdown of the establishment
and media sides of the left's triangle is apparent. …
 |
| Democratic rant alert! |
The Republicans brought Judge Alito's wife to tears?
Give me a fricking break. Is Mr. Daou kidding?
Unfortunately he isn't and neither are the many liberals out there who have the same
take.
With all due respect, it's just nuts. The only reason Mrs. Alito
cried is because she was overwhelmed at Senator Graham coming to her husband's
defense. It's a human reaction to a very stressful situation. If we can't understand
she has feelings then we aren't going to get anywhere. We don't have to
like it, but we can at least be honest with ourselves. The simple fact is that the Democrats
on the Judiciary offered Senator Graham the opportunity, by the ridiculous,
outlandish, unbelievable line of questioning that devolved into Democrats becoming
the story line! How in the hell did we manage that one? Easy, the Democrats
on the committee were an ineffectual disaster collectively.
“Another Dem-bashing occasion,” complains Daou. Well,
if there's mud around, you think they're not going to sling it?
Now I know it's heresy to take on Peter Daou, formerly of the
Kerry campaign, and he is right about #1, “building a buzz about one or
two pivotal Alito issues,” but that's really the only thing that matters.
Hammering the message home from blogs to MSM, from Wolf to the unbelievably
incompetent O'Donnell. Angry outrage isn't going to do it. A methodical case
that makes sense and hits home will.
And if you really want to make the senators stand up and
take notice, let 'em have it when they blow it. You think that won't get their
attention? You think we won't get quoted, especially the more powerful blogs
with real outreach? Blaming Mrs. Alito's crying on Senator Graham sounds like
just what it is, CYA for a group of powerful Democrats who just screwed it up
for all of us. Sometimes to change the “triangle” dynamic you need
to take aim at the right target. The target on this one isn't Senator Graham,
it's the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee. You want clout? Start talking
back to their ineffectual power.
Senator Leahy provided no guidance whatsoever, which ended up
opening out on a haphazard free for all questioning session, which nobody watched,
except what made the highlight reel.
In the end it doesn't matter why Mrs. Alito cried, she cried.
Blame it on the fact that she was overcome, maybe she's got no spine, maybe
it was all a p.r. tactic – oh, brother, what b.s. – but the bottom line is that
the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee set her up to bring them down. Democrats going after Graham
would have made matters worse.
And for the sake of argument, let's just say it was a p.r. stunt
on Mrs. Alito's part. The Democrats on the committee fell for it. Every time
Democrats serve up a scene like this because of our lack of coherency and battle
plan on how to build a case against for instance, Judge Alito, we hand the Washington
Weenies talking points on how attacking doesn't work and we end up with the
likes of Lanny David and Harold Ford being oh, so compliant. Sure, attacking
works, but you have to have a battle plan and know how to pick your battles
then make your case during the war. You also have to understand your audience.
And while we're at it let's be honest, one of the reasons the
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary blew it is that their egos are too big to
sit together, devise a strategy on how to build their case against Judge Alito together,
then execute it methodically, going from one senator to another, until the case
was made. Leahy should have organized a plan on how the Democrats on the committee
could have followed a plan of attack, one at a time. But because of their humongous
egos they all went off on their own fishing expedition. We should expect more
from these Democrats, almost all of whom are lawyers. They should have built
their case as if they were at trial, making the damning argument against Judge Alito
one step at a time, using Alito's own writings, there's plenty of them.
Instead, in the end, we had Joe Biden declaring the hearings are
worthless, with the one image indelibly inked in the mind's of those who bothered
to care, that of Mrs. Alito crying — nothing like giving the right-wing radio
machine, some 20+ million listeners, talking points for a month and then some.
So, consider this… If the senators' egos are too big to come
together in a strategy session, then deal with each other's role and talk about a
detailed and comprehensive battle plan that could actually build a case against
Samuel Alito. Do you actually believe they give a crap about what bloggers
are saying?
The senate power structure has been around for decades and decades.
How old is the blogosphere? The senate is a place of tradition and making your
way up the ladder slowly, paying your dues. The Washington Weenies, including
the MSM, have been around a very long time compared to blogs, besides, we threaten their power. So, you think they're
going to share that power after a couple of years?
Then again, if we blast them when they blow it, somebody is going
to sit up and listen, because the collective shock from the MSM at the bloggers
rising up to bite their own will blow their frickin' minds.
Peter Daou does get several things right, amidst what he gets
wrong. We are on our own until further notice. Did you really think otherwise?
Comments are closed.