Theme Song of the Senate Democrats: "Let's All Get Fooled Again"
The next time I’m on Capitol Hill, remind me to stop in and buy Mitch McConnell and John Cornyn a beer or two. Their performance with the MoveOn legislation was masterful. They must have honed their skills for years taking candy from little babies as youngsters. As a result, they excel in the adult equivalent – running circles around Senate Democrats.
From the rhetorical standpoint, the setup was brilliant. Democrats were forced by the Republican logic to choose sides. On one side, there was MoveOn, the villain du jour for running an ad in the Sept. 10 New York Times questioning whether Gen. David Petraeus was cooking the books on Iraq. The ad cited any number of sources to show that the war isn’t a sterling success, and many Democrats made the identical points before, but no matter. The ad's headline, “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?” was all Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell and company needed to trigger the Democratic auto-response to being accused of being weak.
MoveOn is a group that, according to McConnell, wanted a “pacifist response” to Al-Qaeda and “ran an ad on its website equating the president to Adolph Hitler." On the other side, there is a four-star general, the commander of the multi-national force in Iraq, former commander of the 101st Airborne Div. So it was either stand with the general or stand with people who think the United Nations can rid the world of Al-Qaeda.
There are three possible responses to something like this. Senate Democrats, of course, ended up with the worst possible result. By giving the Republicans a 72-25 victory, splitting the Democratic caucus in half, surpassing the magic 60-vote requirement that stifles almost every other piece of legislation, the Democrats look, again, divided and weak, because they bought into the logic system that the Republican resolution proposed.
The first option was to go along with the underlying logic of the Cornyn amendment. That amendment was built around the politics of personal attacks, and condemned not only the MoveOn ad, and not only the “honor and integrity” of Petraeus, but also “all the members of the United States Armed Forces.” Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) proposed an amendment that condemned all personal attacks, including those on former Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA) and on Sen. John Kerry (D-MA). Her resolution also conceded that the MoveOn ad was an “unwarranted personal attack” on Petraeus. She didn’t reach the magic 60-vote margin. Would Sen. Saxbe Chambliss (R-GA), who was responsible for impugning Cleland, vote for it? No way. Would the Republicans repudiate their own Swift Boaters? No way.
So the Democrats were forced into McConnell’s trap – vote for the General or vote for...traitorious lefties? It was no contest, although it was very disappointing to see stalwarts like Patrick Leahy (VT) and Byron Dorgan (ND) vote for with the Republicans. The freshmen once thought to have such a bright future, like Claire McCaskill (MO) and Amy Klobuchar (MN) caved, as did my home-state duo of Ben Cardin (MD) and Barbara Mikulski (MD), along with Jon Tester (MT). They didn’t want to be seen as voting against the General, which is apparently preferable to driving Congressional approvals even farther down than President Bush’s and making themselves more of a joke. It’s too bad the new legislators are picking up bad habits so soon.
There were two other options, each of which is built around not accepting the logic around which the Republican language was built. The first was simply to tank the vote. You could call that the Akido strategy, after the self-defense technique that throws opponents off by not putting up a fight. They could have skipped the vote or, in the alternative, have everyone vote for it, without debate, making sure through statements off the floor that it was a meaningless bit of fluff and if it made the Republicans happy, then fine.
The other way would have been to rally the troops. Democrats, especially skittish ones (which unfortunately is most of them), won’t put their votes on the line for MoveOn, so they had to be persuaded to vote for something else. How about the truth of the facts in the ad? How about the fact that Petraeus has actively cooperated with the White House in planning the PR offensive for the war? How about the freedom of expression? How about the fact that the ad was nothing more than a bullying tactic? Don’t like those, pick you own. The key would have been to make certain that whatever they did was not included in the view of the world constructed by the Republicans and was something around which all, or at least most, Democrats could rally.
Ah, but these are Democrats we’re talking about, aren’t we. I guess all that stuff about fighting for principle, exercising leadership, having some courage and not being afraid of Republican attack ads doesn’t apply. There is one thing that this crowd is good at -- making President Bush, who has a 30% approval rating, look good.
Remember your Benjamin Franklin, ladies and gentlemen of the Senate Democratic caucus.
Our problem in the senate is that we have no majority leader - we have Harry Reid, he of the wet noodle spine and tapioca brain. Someone needs to tell Sen. Reid that a majority leader can control what gets to be voted on in the senate. Maybe if we could exhume Lyndon Johnson, even in his current lack of condition, he could train Harry. Or, best of all, maybe we could find someone, say Senator Feingold, in the senate, who has a working brain and sufficient spine to keep his head in the right place.
One sure thing, we will not need to worry about finding a suitable majority leader in 2009 if we continue as we are now.
Hoppy in Sacramento
September 20, 2007 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
How in the name of ??? did either of these pieces of nonsense make it to a vote in the Senate? The Dems do seem like they are led by bumblers--I read that Hoyer in the House is pretty much saying "no way" that this nonsense will have a vote in the House. Is there some hidden explanation for the reason the Senate allowed such nonsense?
September 20, 2007 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anybody catch Keith Olbermann rising from his sick bed to do a lesson in history on all the previous generals who have been fairly or unfairly criticized as a routine part of small "d" democratic debate.
Even stodgy old TIME has a great piece from Kinsley mocking the faux outrage at moveon.
Democrats are a joke. Moveon ought to find an anti-war candidate to run in 2008 and stick it to them. Let's see if we can find 5% to vote 3rd party.
September 20, 2007 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dire Straits!
We do not control our own county!
Money is not given for nothing and the presses are not free!
You are in Washington, please tell us what happened?
-----------------------------------------------
Today, are we searching for I deals or Ideals?
-Thinking
September 20, 2007 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Boxer amendment garnered 51 votes (with Feingold voting against it and Lieberman voting for it). Apparently the senate, as on the Webb amendment, must have unanimously agreed that sixty votes would be required to pass the bill, as on the Webb amendment. UNANIMOUSLY. So the senate has now been--what's the word--bastardized? to require, in effect, a cloture majority (60 votes) on every measure. Democracy takes another hit.
Thank you, Dems. You've caved on FISA, military commissions, and habeus corpus. You've failed to filibuster Repub criminals, and you've given these same miscreants a bye so they don't have to filibuster, while allowing some of them to vote for bills that are bound to fail. You've failed to stop the Repub war machine, or even divert it, even though you have the majority.
Well, they won't hate us for our freedom much longer, at this rate.
September 20, 2007 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why didn't the Democrats stand up for free speech? Why do they continue to betray us?
September 21, 2007 4:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let me channel my inner Cassandra-
Around September, 2008, the Republican "Bulldozer" (as Gitlin has aptly named them) will be campaigning on the "fact" that they have won the war and are bringing our boys home, even as the "Defeatocrat" party wanted to "cut and run" and leave America defenseless against Al Qaeda. A pre-election media blitz of troops coming off planes to the welcoming arms of small children waving flags, tearful wives, Republican candidates greeting them on the tarmac with military bands playing.
Of course, the pictures from Iraq will remain the same. We just wont have to watch them anymore. Until after the manufactured "Iranian Attack", that is. Then this "unprovoked attack" will require the military response that is already planned and locked into the firing solution. So when Democrats are running against the stalwart Republican "heroes" in October, they will be conflated to be the cause for the Iranian attack on our "ally" Iraq because of their weakness in supporting the war. At the same time, Osama bin Laden will strike at Mushariff (almost on cue) to further reinforce the fear of "them crazy mooslims" in the voting public.
So with the Republican echo chamber being led by Rudy and John, kill-them-all-let-Allah-sort-em-out, we will watch helplessly as the warring nature of this tribe wins the day and the elections.
Oww. My head hurts. Where am I?
Alphonse ( Al ) Kada
Iranians are fighting the Americans in Iraq so they don't have to fight them on the streets of Tehran
September 21, 2007 4:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Over the weekend, I'm going to go look at THOMAS and see who the brave 25 were. I'm going to send each of them a thank-you for their courage and defense of free speech. Maybe if the brave get enough fan mail the timid might grow a spine.
aMike
September 21, 2007 4:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Duncan C. Kinder
http://www.billingsgatereport.net
So much for, "I disagree with what you have to say but will fight to the death to protect your right to say it."
Will somebody explain to me why it makes any difference whether the Democrats or the Republicans have been elected and - if so - precisely what.
I am tired of being told that the Democrats are "weak," have been "fooled" or "need to grow a pair." This sort of stuff is obviously deliberate on their part. If you think otherwise, then let me speak plainly, YOU are weak, are being fooled, and its time that YOU "grew a pair."
Also, I hope that all of you have donated to MoveOn.
BTW: if any of you think that health care reform or anything else like that is actually going to happen, then you really do need to start thinking straight.
September 21, 2007 6:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Amy Klobuchar caved? I believe she does it often and well.
September 21, 2007 7:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hoppy in Sacramento
September 21, 2007 8:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Al,
Sort of Mission Accomplished II, you mean. But "Cassandra" is right. I don't believe it will happen because this war, they think, they being R's and D's, can never end. It's a continuous "good war" which is good for the bottom lines of profit and power. I feel a draft.
September 21, 2007 8:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Freedom of speech is not absolute and traditionally has not protected defamation.
September 21, 2007 8:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree fully with most of the article, except the idea that the Dems were "forced" into a trap. There was no great uproar over the ad except from the usual herders of idiots. Nobody much cared, and most Americans, according to the polls, thought Petraeus would probably lie, and then believed that he had fulfilled those expectations.
There was no trap and no reason for the Senate Dems to march into it. They were not being defensive, they were being "pro-active" to show off how incredibly patriotic and military-loving they are. None of it was necessary. What passes for "strategy" among Dems was the pathetic Boxer resolution, which was actually worse than the Cornyn version in that it lumped MoveOn with the swiftboat gang of crooks and liars. As is so often the case, Feingold was the only one who stood up for reality instead of clumsy, childish attempts at propaganda and voted NO on both versions.
MoveOn gave the Dems their Senate majority. At least some of the moral cowards who voted against them, including Webb, McCaskill, Tester, and Casey, would not be in the Senate without MoveOn's millions of GOTV calls and ground work on their behalf. The ones who walked into the trap were MoveOn and its thousands of volunteers. They thought they were dealing with honorable people. Now they and other independent political organizations will have to go through an agonizing reassessment of their strategies. I can't see anyplace for them to go except a few individual Dems like Feingold and Rep. Pete Stark, who managed to get it exactly right:
The Senate Dem majority's sole accomplishment thus far has been to disgrace themselves by publicly turning on their friends and enabling their enemies. I think they can now officially kiss their '08 blockbuster landslide goodbye -- they have no allies left except the geniuses at the DLC.
But I misspeak: they accomplished something else: they proved for once and for all, beyond a doubt, that Nader was right all along. The one ray of hope out of all this is that their craven bumbling may ignite a successful insurgency that at long last breaks the two-party puppet show for good.
September 21, 2007 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Then please pass the Paxil...
Alphonse ( Al ) Kada
Iranians are fighting the Americans in Iraq so they don't have to fight them on the streets of Tehran
September 21, 2007 10:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
Shared sacrifice? Surely you jest! Just the thing to bring the war to a speedy conclusion AND save money on all those huge enlistment bonuses.
How about the Ivy League students first.....
Alphonse ( Al ) Kada
Iranians are fighting the Americans in Iraq so they don't have to fight them on the streets of Tehran
September 21, 2007 10:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Back in "Lies, And The Lying Liars Who Tell Them", Al Franken had a great deconstruction of Hannity and Colmes where he consistently put Colmes name in a tiny font. Never, in my 31 years as a registered Democrat, would I have believed that the whole Democratic party would earn a tiny font in American history. Not even when they let Bush invade Iraq. But now, as they squander a majority, they are as tiny as they can get.
September 21, 2007 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
was it defamation? the headline was "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" so the reader was left to make his/her own choice.
it's not like my friends and I take the "military industrial complex" seriously these days.
To boldly go...
September 21, 2007 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I am looking forward to the autopsy on this victim of the 1st amd. I want to know exactly how this played out.
September 21, 2007 11:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
As far as I'm concerned, all of this is about power--and who gets to keep it.
Anyone around in trying to end the Vietnam War remembers how many of us said we would never ridicule our military again--and yet, here is moveon doing the exact same thing. Doesn't matter if they were right on the facts--it still hit the military and it was not a very good idea when you're trying to persuade folks to join with you. Believe me, there was plenty of GOP noise--particularly directed against Dem winners in 2006 who got moveon money.
What's really interesting is the reason the Dem leadership in the Senate allowed the Boxer or the moveon crap into the Senate chambers.
Reid certainly voted for this war in 2002. Hillary did. And they say it was because of Bush lies. Here's moveon pretty much saying the same thing--the puppet general is lying for Bush. It's cover for Hillary and other Dems and "proof" that the GOP is lying now as it did in 2002. So these folks could get a bit more cover for their their own sorry judgment in 2002.
It did something else. It undercuts internet organizations like moveon and the money they are able to raise. It sends a message to Dems who took this money in 2006--and won--that moveon is not an organization with staying power; it will fizzle, mainly because of dumb ads like this one.
There's a bit of undercutting of Obama because of his vote and non-vote. Is he trustworthy? It is an attempt to undercut internet support for Obama.
There's a reason the Senate Dems brought this to the floor of the Senate. Pure politics and it was to benefit themselves--not us folks outside of DC who continue to be ignored. We are simply not viewed as a "movement" with staying power. That's the reason we are ignored--Edwards and Obama have defined the fight exactly right. right. So did Hillary's "invisible" ad, which played into what so many Dems believe outside of DC--our own leaders ignore us. And that one certainly got pulled quickly.
This had nothing to do with the GOP; it had to do with DC Dems holding on to their power. And that tells me that they believe they have a problem on their hands with organizations and people they aren't able to control.
I would suggest that moveon get more politically savvy very quickly. These Dems are not going to give up power without a serious fight.
September 21, 2007 12:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's a trojan horse for somebody. I don't know what the deal is or who has her bought but she is under no local pressure whatever to vote like a Blue Dog from Mississippi. So why is she doing it?
September 21, 2007 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a 10.
September 21, 2007 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem with the Dems isn't MoveOn, its Reid and Pelosi/Hoyer. They give you passive leadership.
September 21, 2007 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
MoveOn is about ready to present the Senate Republicans and turncoat Democrats with a certificate of appreciation! As of a few minutes ago MoveOn had raised $500,000 as a result of their action yesterday. And, that total is being pushed to $1,000,000 to fund another great ad on TV. Let me be one of the first to thank those individuals who have so generously assisted MoveOn in this fund drive! And, thanks to the MoveOn members who did the donating, too.
Hoppy in Sacramento
September 21, 2007 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks DB, Sent your last two paragraphs to my Democratic Senator here in CO.
Kevin Russell Cook, Chairman, county regular Democratic organization
September 21, 2007 10:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
They won't impeach 'cause they got the Whitehouse in the bag. (The fools don't know how easily they'll be rolled.)
Kevin Russell Cook
September 21, 2007 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looks like you're gonna be one unhappy camper when MoveOn funnels scads of money to Dem candidates in the Summer and Fall of '08.
Kevin Russell Cook
September 21, 2007 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
They may or may not funnel money to them. They won't have thousands of volunteers for GOTV unless they're backing some other party. Enthusiasm and trust still can't be bought.
September 22, 2007 8:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's sort of like active submission, isn't it?
September 22, 2007 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Is this too impolite to write to a Senator? I don't want to come off as a nutter, but I'm mad enough to send it.
Dear Senator X,
I would like you to explain why you voted yea on the move to censure MoveOn.org for its NYT ad on General Petraeus. And I think I would like you to apologize for having done so.
Frankly, I thought the MoveOn ad headline was naiive. But to allow yourself, in your capacity as a Senator, to be suckered into censuring MoveOn for placing it, represents a level of naiivete considerably higher than the one that allowed the ad to go forward.
After all the rotten things that Movement Conservatives, NeoCons and Republican handlers have written and said about ordinary people who dare to question the tortured versions of the facts that dragged us into this war and continue to keep us there, I simply don't know why you would get involved with picking on MoveOn for putting out this ad. It is just stunningly dumb.
How about introducing a bill to censure Rush Limbaugh, or Ann Coulter, or Bill O'Reilly? None in sight. Your constituents are on their own when it comes to defending themselves from those hurtful, virulent and damaging attacks.
No one is asking you to drench yourself in patchouli and burn George Bush in effigy, but how about listening to the people who put you in office to bring some truth and perspective to the discussion of this war? This vote doesn't reflect a commitment to truth or perspective, standing as it does without accompanying censures for far greater transgressions from the other side. As it stands, it's just one more example of the way so many Democrats let themselves be suckered (sorry, there's no other word for it) into spouting empty rhetoric in a desperate effort to look tough on terror and supportive of our men and women in uniform at the expense of really confronting the issues at hand.
Please stop this nonsense. A few more Democratic abstenstions on this vote would have said a lot. How about "there are more important issues to censure on than one ad that went a too far." You KNOW the Republicans are going to use this vote to slap down future critiques from MoveOn and others; I can hear it now--"This extremist group's own Senators censured it for this kind of speech."
Good grief. Please try to be a little smarter about this stuff. One expects this sort of mindlessness from guys like Norm Coleman and David Vitter--you are clearly an intelligent person, and I believe you can do better in the service of your constituents and of the truth itself. Remember, we gave you a majority in the name of truth and perspective. Use it.
Thank you for the opportunity to express my opinion on this matter.
September 22, 2007 12:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I rated your post unproductive. This is why:
Freedom of speech is not absolute
A nonsequitor, and has nothing to do with the issue. An example of the limitation of free speech is the following: You can't yell "fire" in a theater.
But an organization CAN, however pay for an ad that uses someone's name as a pun to draw attention to their behavior or activities, in that organization's opinion.
That is what free speech is, Don! I am not drawing parallels between this and Ann Coulter, but if anyone has gone past her limit, it would be she. Do you remember when she suggested that someone should feed rat poison to one of the Supreme Court Justices? I consider that to be another example of where limits should be drawn, but even I wouldn't expect Congress to VOTE on it! How absurd!
and traditionally has not protected defamation.
Defamation requires slander or libelous statements that hurt the good reputation of an innocent person. I think the General's reputation is right where it was before the ad, don't you? Except he will probably get an extra zero behind his book advance.
Maybe you think Congress should vote to censure Hillary for calling Dick Cheney, "Darth Vader." I mean, Darth Vader at least fought for the dark side! Cheney just sends other peoples' children to fight for his war-profiteer friends. Clearly Hillary has defamed Darth, and the vote should begin ASAP!
Jan
September 22, 2007 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it sounds straightforward, reasonable and restrained even, given the circumstances.
Here's is what a letter to my Senator would look like:
Dear Senator Cornyn,
You suck.
Thank you for the opportunity to express my opinion on this matter.
September 22, 2007 12:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow! You said it best! I want to send your post to Webb (my Senator), but I don't think they ever even read what they are sent. At least that is my impression from the canned responses I always get
Jan
September 22, 2007 12:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can you explain (without using republican talking points) how honest criticism (which the majority of the ad was about -- not the silly pun of the general's name) ridicules the army?
Do you believe that someone in a uniform should get a pass on truth just because they WEAR a uniform? What happened during the Vietnam conflict was that soldiers were blamed for our national policy of a wrong war. They were not ridiculed; they were BLAMED unjustly.
This headline was just an eye-catcher; unfortunately, in our sound-bite world, that will probably be all that is remembered. The criticisms within were accurate and need to be out there.
It is exactly this mislabeling of dialogue as "ridicule," or lack of patriotism, or my favorite --> "not supporting the troops" that is killing the freedoms that they believe they are fighting for. The general showed who he cares about, and it isn't the troops.
As to this:
...moveon is not an organization with staying power; it will fizzle, mainly because of dumb ads like this one.
I guess time will tell.
Jan
September 22, 2007 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well then, I'm in pretty good shape. :^)
September 22, 2007 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jan,
I rated your post good. This is why:
I liked it.
I didn't agree with all of it, but most of it was right on. Sooo--I think my post was productive, no matter what you think. So there.
September 22, 2007 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm curious; what did I say that you disagree with?
As to this:
I liked it.
Thanks. I do have a way with words, don't I?
Jan
September 23, 2007 9:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
It would be refreshing to hear some "centrist" dem (say, Biden, eg.) who, upon getting "jacked up" by a Bill O'Reilly and invited publicly to repudiate or endorse the Move On ed, (etc, ad nauseum) would respond:
"The anti-war left is a family, and like family we discuss our differences face to face--I don't see anyone from move on here, and if I did, and if I had a problem with them, I would discuss it privately, not through a public intermediary. Your transparent and odious attempt to stir up trouble in my family is within your rights to mount, but I'm not obliged to play along."
September 23, 2007 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republican fund raising attempt:
"Regardless of how you feel about the war in Iraq, Americans must always value the sacrifice and service of America's soldiers. We cannot let our political views cloud our judgment and cast any shadow of a doubt on our soldiers' honor.
Sign the Petition to Senate Democrats today urging them to return MoveOn's contributions.
And after you complete the Petition, please make an immediate contribution of $25, $50, $75, $100, $500 or even $1,000 to our efforts to regain the Republican Senate Majority."
Good idea: The Democrats return the money to MoveOn, which in turn uses those very funds to support challengers in the primaries to the Democrats who voted for the resolution.
September 25, 2007 9:29 PM | Reply | Permalink