-
I assume you meant the Democratic convention in 2008. That being said, and having been an opponent of the Iraq excursion from the beginning, I'm not sure if there is a single Dem, especially one that could muster the national spotlight and following, that would lead a McCarthy-like campaign. Dean is the closest I have seen in my time.
Who of the current crop of Senators or Reps, since Governors would tend not to run such a campaign (w/Dean being the obvious exception)? Feingold is the only Senator of those I have heard making grumblings about a possible run who voted against the war, and despite being possibly the most left-leaning of any in the "field," Feingold has always struck me as the ultimate establishment progressive (i.e. he rarely votes against Presidential appointments, is not a verbal bomb thrower like Boxer). And, well, I don't see any left leaning members of the House being quixotic enough to run.
Basically, I don't see it happening, and I hope to all hell that by the time the 2008 convention rolls around we have significantly reduced our forces (Biden said in 2 years we could seriously begin to draw down, if ...), and Congressional Dems have made significant gains that allow them to exercise oversight of the White House, and put together a legitimate "success strategy" (as Wes Clark loves to say).
Posted at June 12, 2005 6:22 PM in response to Chicago '68?
-
I think just about everyone should read, and could agree with, Ed's post. This whole situation reminds me of a scene from the documentary about Clinton's 1992 campaign, War Room. In the scene, Carville gets off the phone with some reporter and is fuming. He then goes off on an "us against them" tirade, in which he claims all the reporters are nice to Bush because "Jim Baker III gives them tickets to the Kennedy Center" ... it's great stuff if you haven't seen it, but I digress. The real point is, Carville says, in his tirade, "we could be off by $4 on our budget projections and they'd be off by $14 billion and they'd just report, both campaigns budget numbers were off"
Dean, and all Democrats, are going to have to realize, as Ed said, that he's playing by the "Hillary Rules" ... now let's just hope he plays with Hillary's ease.Posted at June 11, 2005 5:09 PM in response to Defending the Doctor in Context
-
Anon ... you were right on with the point about Obama using American history to stress the successes and achievements of liberalism. Obviously, conservatives have always done this (how many times in your average Right wing rant do you hear "founding fathers"), even going so far as to without fail always mention the tax cut that JFK enacted (without, of course mentioning that when he took office, the top bracket was much higher than today) after winning the White House.
By intertwining liberalism and major accomplishments of American history, Obama is hitting a note that Marshall Whitman is always bringing up BullBooseBlog - - progressive national greatness. Bear Any Burden isn't a Republican theme, it's ours, just like this country is and we need to take it back.Posted at June 11, 2005 4:49 PM in response to Hope Is On the Way?
-
To tell you the truth, I am pretty disappointed by the reaction here to that speech. Let's forget any political calculations, let's forget the greater context of the speech (Reagan Revolution vs. Clinton's vision - of course by saying this I am bound to piss a lot of people off), read those words. Read them again.
How can you not be blown away? How can you not put down your coffee and just say YES!
I felt like the best of JFK and William Jefferson Clinton just combined with a young African American senator, and his personal distinct background, to deliver a speech that absolutely encapsulated a view of prgressive national greatness that everyone from the center to the far left could accept (and all that was done within the non-politcal setting of a grad speech).
Call me naive, sayi I'm on the bandwagon, I don't care. I just got chills reading those words. 2008 may or may not be his time, maybe he gets on the ticket, maybe we win the White House with an "older" VP who then moves to Secretary of State in the second term (excuse me, is the Gentleman from Delaware listening). Who knows, and right now, who cares. For the first time since the election I feel like an elected Dem articulated a bold positive vision for the future.
Sign Me Up.Posted at June 11, 2005 7:43 AM in response to Hope Is On the Way?
-
Tommy the Cork by David McKean is my most recent favorite. The ultimate description of how Washington can turn the most idealistic, reform minded young intellectual into a crass operator. And any book where a lobbyist shows up in the Supreme Court chambers and tells a justice, "I put you on this court, now produce!" ... is worth a read.
What It Takes by Richard Ben Cramer is the best campaign book I ever read (follows the 6 major candidates in the 1988 campaign), althought Fear and Loathing '72 is (obviously) a close second
Also, I'm not sure if it's been mentioned here yet, but Charlie Wilson's War by George Crile may not be the best book ever written but it is damn entertaining, especially considering the importance of Afghanistan to 21st century geopolitics
Posted at June 8, 2005 8:21 PM in response to History
