-
You must be joking. It's vastly more serious to break the laws of our country, and violate the Constitution than it is to lie bout cheating on your wife. The only person who really cared about Bill Clinton cheating on his wife was his wife. It did not affect our nation in any significant way - or at least it wouldn't have, if Republicans hadn't been so obsessed with dragging it out for as long as possible.
It's worth noting that Clinton's approval ratings were in the 60s and 70s throughout the impeachment hearings over his affair. The American public clearly didn't see it as reflective of his ability to govern.
George Bush, on the other hand, has shown time and time again that he has no regard for the law, and considers his administration to be completely unaccountable to the public for their policies.
I think that gig is pretty much over for these scumballs. No matter how many go down in the current round of investigations, a lot more will go down in '06.Posted at December 16, 2005 12:59 PM in response to Spying on Americans and John Bolton
-
I have speculated about this previously, but today is the first time I've seen an article talking about Bolton's office in relation to the Plame leak.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/Posted at July 12, 2005 1:37 PM in response to Rove the "System Coach"
-
Here are a couple questions I've yet to hear anyone ask, but which seems fairly glaring to me...
If Judith Miller's source was also Karl Rove, she hardly had a reason to withhold his name since it had already been divulged...
So, who is the second WH source that Judith Miller is protecting?
And also, I can't help but wonder if Valerie Plame's name was one of the 10 operatives that Bolton requested the names of while Undersecretary for Arms Control... the names the WH wouldn't release to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during the confirmation hearrings....Posted at July 12, 2005 8:43 AM in response to Bergen and McCarthy
-
I think it's time Progressive Democrats created an ideological framework that supports and affirms our beliefs. I don't just think this will appeal to 20-somethings, but to people like me, too (40-somethings)...
Ideology helps you do a couple of things. First of all, it allows you to focus on the positive outcomes of the policies. And it allows people to feel connected emotionally to the ideology. Because after the 3rd or 4th plank, you've sort out outlined what kind of person is going to vote for you... It's like painting an emotional picture that people can aspire to...
If you can create that ideology frame on all the major issues - Terrorism, Iraq, Social Security, Energy, Judicial independence, free press...
It's finding the positive way to articulate the message quickly... that's the key I think to exciting people, and motivating them emotionally, which is what we want to do.
Intellectual motivation doesn't work.
Create the perfect progressive Democrat, then 'reverse engineer' them to express their most idealistic, heartfelt beliefs on each issue - In 10 words or less...
If we can do that, we win.Posted at June 30, 2005 2:31 PM in response to Progressives and Twenty-Somethings
-
Mr. Baer --
You are so miserably off the beam, it borders on Greek Drama...
But the good news is that you have beautifully illustrated why Democrats should never hire Democratic consultants: Because after floating around D.C. for a thousand years or so, you STILL have not grasped a basic PR principle.
You're supposed to beat up on the OTHER guy.
I know. It's crazy.
You have a forum here in which to produce ANY KIND of productive message for Progressive candidates. You could have approached your critique of the hearing from any perspective.
What you CHOSE was to do the following:
1) Repeat every half-truth the Milbank article contained, refuting none, providing no counter-points, engaging in no challenge to the usual sink-hole spewage that passes for journalism these days.
2) You did not make even the slightest effort to mention any of the Progressive organizations that outline a vast array of policy positions in many areas, including foreign policy. Instead, you simply announced that they did not exist and moved on.
3) You went out of your way to ignore the obvious, which is that while the hearing was organized by Senate Democrats, you give equal credence to the other whacked out nutjobs who showed up and passed out whatever garbage they passed out.
4) And this is my favorite... you refer to "conspiratorial and anti-Semitic delusions" cropping up on the left... for which the only evidence you cite is Dana Milbank's account of the proceedings...
I could go on, but instead I'm going to move on to the really important point that I hope you take from this:
Please try to keep away from future Progressive campaigns... in fact, you might think about actually being a Republican consultant... I like the idea of you "helping" them...
Posted at June 21, 2005 1:54 PM in response to The Land of Make-Believe
