Our party is sending messages to the grassroots, netroots, liberals, activists, and others who speak out with emotion....
The latest message was sent to Congressman Pete Stark of California by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Stark dared to express views on the House floor that made some on the right angry. So his remarks were condemned by Pelosi in public. Needless to say the folks over at Hot Air are drooling over her putdown. They figure they won another round.
Pelosi condemns Stark's remarksHouse Speaker Nancy Pelosi rebuked a fellow San Francisco Bay-area liberal Friday for what she said were "inappropriate" comments about Iraq during a congressional debate.
During a debate on children's health care Thursday, Rep. Pete Stark accused Republicans of sending troops to Iraq to "get their heads blown off for the president's amusement."
Condemnations rolled in from Republican politicians; right-leaning bloggers had a field day; and a White House spokesman declined to "dignify those remarks" with a response.
Guess that will teach Stark to show too much emotion.
Remember when Dick Durbin actually showed some emotion and made comments that the right wing did not like? Well, he sure did end up apologizing also, didn't he? Not really an activist, but he really learned not to speak unpleasantly.
Durbin Apologizes for Remarks on AbuseSen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) yesterday offered a tearful apology on the Senate floor for comparing the alleged abuse of prisoners by American troops to techniques used by the Nazis, the Soviets and the Khmer Rouge, as he sought to quell a frenzy of Republican-led criticism.
Durbin, the Democratic whip, acknowledged that "more than most people, a senator lives by his words" but that "occasionally words will fail us and occasionally we will fail words." Choking up, he said: "Some may believe that my remarks crossed the line. To them, I extend my heartfelt apologies."
The Democrats who criticized him also criticized Stark for "stepping on the message" so to speak. Really. I loved the messages they sent. But then that's just me. They always say they had the other side on the ropes. Not sure they did.
Not long ago they took a vote to condemn MoveOn for an ad. The vote to condemn got more votes than the SCHIP.
House condemns MoveOnThe House on Wednesday overwhelmingly voted to condemn the liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org for a recent advertisement attacking the top U.S. general in Iraq.
By a 341-79 vote, the House passed a resolution praising the patriotism Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and condemning a MoveOn.org ad that referred to Petraeus as "General Betray Us."
Guess we found out quickly where their priorities lay. SCHIP did not get enough votes to override the veto. Amazing, isn't it?
On September 27 one of the most blatant put downs of the grassroots, netroots, liberals, activists was put front and center on the DLC website. The article, which is linked to the full David Brooks op ed was even more insulting to us because the DLC only published parts of it....those geared to put grassroots, netroots, liberals, activists in their places.
The Center Holdsby David Brooks
In the beginning of August, liberal bloggers met at the YearlyKos convention while centrist Democrats met at the Democratic Leadership Council's National Conversation. Almost every Democratic presidential candidate attended YearlyKos, and none visited the D.L.C.
At the time, that seemed a sign that the left was gaining the upper hand in its perpetual struggle with the center over the soul of the Democratic Party. But now it's clear that was only cosmetic.
Ouch, that hurt.
Now it's evident that if you want to understand the future of the Democratic Party you can learn almost nothing from the bloggers, billionaires and activists on the left who make up the "netroots. You can learn most of what you need to know by paying attention to two different groups -- high school educated women in the Midwest, and the old Clinton establishment in Washington.
Yes, that is who is in charge. David Brooks is right about who controls the message in DC.
..."The fact is, many Democratic politicians privately detest the netroots' self-righteousness and bullying. They also know their party has a historic opportunity to pick up disaffected Republicans and moderates, so long as they don't blow it by drifting into cuckoo land. They also know that a Democratic president is going to face challenges from Iran and elsewhere that are going to require hard-line, hawkish responses.
Ouch, again.
The problem is that they consider anyone who is anti-war and anti the corporatist agenda to be in "cuckoo land." That is a whole lot of us "cuckoo" folks. Yes, they actually had this front page and center at the DLC on September 27. Guess that tells us what they think.
All the enthusiasm is squelched almost at once now. Anyone who uses less than carefully chosen words is put in their places quickly. It is going to hurt our party in the long run.
I read some words today in the New York Times, and it essentially confirmed what most of us have thought for a while. The words appear to confirm that when you say too much and are too outspoken, you will be "tamed", you will soon "conform".
It is like a "taming" process. You learn speaking out has consequences. Crossing the established order has consequences.
A conversation today with Mr. Dean is a study in discipline compared with his offhand remarks that were prone to generate headlines four years ago.
He doesn’t disagree with the assessment, saying he is “unlike the old me.” Why such caution? “You live and you learn, right?” he replies.So a string of questions are answered with a fresh, yet telling, caution:
Should Al Gore get into the race? “I’ve never discussed that with him and I don’t plan to.
My bailiwick is to stay out of that stuff.” After 26 seconds of silence, he changes the subject and asks his lunch guests, “Coffee, strawberry shortcake anybody?”If Democrats want the best nominee possible, why not weigh in?
“What I tell Democrats is do not vote with your head, vote with your heart.” Did that happen four years ago? “I’m not going to get into that — at all!”
At this point in the race, how do the candidates compare with those 2004? “They’re starting to look presidential, which is how you win.” Pausing for a moment, he laughed. “I’m not sure I ever looked presidential,” he said.
Interview with DeanDon't know who will be next to speak out without the proper caution, but by this time we know their fate. Not sure of all the reasons for the pressure to conform, but I am very sure of one thing.
I am sure it is hurting a party that should be coming together to confront and stand up to a man who once said it would all be so much easier if he were a dictator. It is sucking enthusiasm out of the room, and I don't think the party leaders in Congress even recognize what is happening.
DU Donor
