Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community

Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy

by BooMan
Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 07:43:32 PM EST

I'll admit that the Yearly Kos convention-goers make an easy target for ridicule. We're old, we dress kind of funny, we're a little geeky about computers, and political junkies of any persuasion are always a bit odd. Back in September 2005 a lot of the more traditional and cantankerous bloggsters went down to Washington DC to protest the war in Iraq. Some of the kewl kids thought we were wasting our time. But, those of us that went knew that what we were doing was important and empowering. A large part of the sense of empowerment that we shared in DC was not related to how many feet we put on the Mall, but about meeting our online friends in real life, and seeing a digital reality because manifest in the real world. Electron broadband blasts became real action in real time.

Yearly Kos has that same feel. Thousands of people are meeting all over this city and greeting each with their user names, discussing each other's diaries, and the diaries of their favorite writers. And, it is all in a context where our votes are being courted by the Democratic leadership and presidential aspirants.

It's heady stuff, and it's hard to get my mind around how fast the Daily Kos community went from a place where we pissed and moaned to a place that has this kind of pull. On one level, it's great. Even for the people that have been alienated from the Daily Kos community during its rise to prominence and power, this should be seen as positive development. But, all is not well in Kossackistan. I may be the first to bring this up, but it certainly would have been brought up without me being the one to say it. Especially after Mark Warner's keynote speech.

Daily Kos Yearly Kos Gov. Mark Warner

Markos introduced Mark Warner. And when he did so, he has very clear that he has not endorsed Warner for President in 2008. He also was clear that his friend Jerome Armstrong very much wants him to endorse Warner. And he was clear that he is impressed and pleased with Warner because he was the first major politician to agree to come to Yearly Kos, that by doing so he had lent credibility to the conference and led many other politicians to attend, and that Warner has shown a willingness to engage the netroots movement. Those are the facts. And I share those sentiments with Markos. Warner is coming after our votes and he is being very aggressive about it. That is not a bad thing.

But there can be no avoiding a controversy about the close relationship that is developing between Warner and Daily Kos. Warner was not only granted the keynote speech; prior to the speech he was allowed to pass out free Yearly Kos t-shirts with his face (not Markos's or Wesley Clark's, or FDR's, or Russ Feingold's, or Hillary Clinton's, or Armando's) superimposed on the front. And on the back, it says 'Forward Together' and 'Authorized and Paid for by Forward Together PAC.' That is Mark Warner's presidential political action committee. Then we were all subjected to a Kennedyesque five-minute canned campaign infomercial. Then Warner gave a well presented and well received speech, emphasizing a Dukakis-like technocratic competency that was striking (if one hadn't been expecting it) for its lack of ideology.

All of this came on the heels of Warner's huge blowout part last night at the Stratosphere (an event that was in no way affiliated with Yearly Kos). The party was lavish, providing cocktails, a sushi bar, and carved meats and cheese trays.

Even before the Keynote address I was hearing a lot of grumbling about Warner's decision to spend so much money buttering up the Kossack crowd. After the t-shirt and informercial stunts, I heard a lot more grumbling.

For some, the problem is a simple matter of how Warner is choosing to spend his money. But for others, the problem is that Mark Warner is a centrist candidate that has strong connections to the Democratic Leadership Council. And it is jarring to see Markos go from declaring war on the DLC to coming within inches of endorsing a DLC candidate for President over two years out from the election.

Let's be clear about one thing. Markos did not endorse Warner. He was explicit about that. But he has given Warner a major platform to try to win over the Kossack community and to raise his profile from a little known Governor, to someone that might give (another DLC candidate) Hillary Clinton a run for her money.

And the question then becomes, "is this what Daily Kos wants? Has Daily Kos come to a point where they are going to cozy up to the Democratic Leadership Council?' Why are we so opposed to Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman, if not because they supported the war and do not advocate leaving Iraq? How is Mark Warner any different in this regard?"

I've sat down with Governor Warner and discussed Iraq with him. I like Governor Warner and I know that he is torn over what to do in Iraq. I appreciate, really appreciate, his attitude towards the netroots, toward the progressive community, and toward me personally. I think he is a good man, and I think he should be taken seriously as a candidate. Not all DLC members are the same. There is a big difference between Lieberman, Bayh, and Hillary on the one hand and Warner, Richardson, and Vilsack on the other. Gore is a DLC candidate cut from another mold.

The way the Presidential race is shaping up, it looks like John Edwards and Russ Feingold are going to be the only non-DLC candidates with a prayer of winning. So, looking at Mark Warner makes some sense. At least he is listening, being respectful, and has shown us good-will. Hillary is busy in New York City this weekend.

So, I'm not bashing Mark Warner. I'm not questioning Markos's gratefulness to Warner, or his decision to give Warner the keynote spot. But, I don't think the Kossack community is ready to give up the fight for a more progressive candidate and more progressive politics a full two years before the election. And we are going to see a battle royale between those that think Russ Feingold or John Edwards are the proper candidates to carry the orange banner and those that are won over by coconut shrimp, and free kosmopolitans and t-shirts.

Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy | 99 comments (99 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Thanks, Booman (4.00 / 5)

This is a repost of my reply from the orange version:

This is exactly what I'm extremely wary of as well. Despite what people may think individually of Warner - and I've heard good things about him from VA people - he is literally a DLC member. And he does seem to lack ideology, as Booman says here and in an earlier post when he met him in the Philadelphia area.

Quite simply, it is extremely puzzling indeed. And I won't be supporting Warner unless he articulates some clear, progressive positions on the major issues. The fact that he is another equivocator on Iraq is awful.

Of the probable candidates, Russ Feingold is still my man. He's been right on everything.

by PsiFighter37 on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:12:50 PM EST

Re: Thanks, Booman (4.00 / 1)

Feingold.

Yes, he has been right.

PLUS...he's Jewish. (Shhh...!!!)

Which combination in the short-sighted, cowardly world of the weak-minded makes him a sure loser.

And where's the profit in THAT???

I can see it now.

Jerome Armstrong.

The Donna Brazile of 2008.

Sad.

Stand up and fight these people.

Now.

Before it's too late.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:38:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Before It's Too Late for What, Arthur? (4.00 / 5)

It's already too late for the Democratic Party, at least in this iteration. The party is absolutely dominated by "centrists." Most, if not all, of the DLC bashing by major "left" bloggers like Kos has been about tactics, not ideology (hence their pretty enthusiastic feelings about Simon Rosenberg, who's ideologically pretty much where the DLC is, but tactically high tech). The last time a candidate from the actual left wing of the Democratic Party stood any chance whatsoever of winning the nomination was 1988. And the Jesse Jackson campaign, and the hope that it fostered, truly seems like ancient history today. Since then, the major "left" Democratic candidates have been either ex (or not-so-ex) DLCers like Bradley (in 2000) and Dean (in 2004), metaideological "mavericks" like Jerry Brown (in 1992), who was a New Democrat avant le lettre back in the days in which he was enthusiastically supporting Prop 13 as Governor of California, or hopeless candidates like Kucinich (in 2004), the central purpose of whose candidacy was to keep onboard the party the few remaining progressive Democrats more committed to their political principles than to ABGOP fearmongering.

I personally gave up on the Democratic Party in the mid-1990s. But I understand those who feel that the prospects for third parties are so bad that they want to stick with the Dems. I only hope they realize how bad the prospects for progressives within the Democratic Party have become. And if they want to work within the Democratic Party, that they work to oppose party centrists by any means necessary. One thing's for sure: the centrists will continue to treat the left as the enemy, whether or not the left wants to make the largely one-sided battle for the soul of the Democratic Party into something a bit more competitive.

Become a Card-Carrying Green!

by GreenSooner (greensooner@NOSPAMintergate.com) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:07:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Warner would be disaster/Kos' head swelling. (none / 0)

Warner has a horrible record of getting in ugly wars with other Democrats in Virginia, and running to members of the press (who have no love for members of the Democratic Party) to leak dirt on fellow party members who may disagree with him.

Of course the press loves Warner. The press are drooling to get Warner into the White House and have Warner calling them to drop dirt about fellow Democrats every time he has a minor squabble.

----

Also... Kos doesn't have to endorse Warner to start BANNING people from Daily Kos who criticize Warner. We all know who little it takes for Kos to detonate and start purging members who disagree with him. The "It's Kos' blog, he can allow who he wants to post there" excuse only goes so far once someone starts having national bloggers conference events and they make sure whole damn national event is named after themselves.

Yes... that issue does concern me. What kind of egotistical freak allows a national convention of any kind to be named after HIMSELF?

"...Dammit, whatever happened to the concept of accountability for catastrophic failure?..." -Al Gore

by afs on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 11:25:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Warner would be disaster/Kos' head swelling. (none / 0)

Sign me up for the tickets to Boomania 2007!

Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?

by Man Without A Country on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 06:07:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 7)

Welcome to the Big Leagues.

Politics is all about gaining influence. It should not come as a shock that Warner, advised by Jerome, would make the first move on Kossackstan.

And he won't be the last candidate to do this. Even Hillary will be begging by 2008, just you watch.

Obama is a Patriot

by Steven D on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:13:46 PM EST

KOS has changed (4.00 / 2)

Politics is all about gaining influence. It should not come as a shock that Warner, advised by Jerome, would make the first move on Kossackstan.

My personal observation is that KOS (the site) has changed, and that change's timing coincides with the banning and censoring wars/trends that have come about over the last 6-12 months. There is probably a direct relationship between this change at KOS and the growth of this PROGRESSIVE site, although I do not have the figures.

I am very much against censorship of LEGITITMATE comment, especially political comment these days, and I originally joined KOS because of the lack of censorship and openness over these. However, with the CASEY-Sanotrum primary race and the topic of election fraud and others, things have changed over at KOS. It has become a cheerleading blog for a specific political point of view. Identifying whose views are being forced by the censorship-banning, and you will know the answer to your riddle. Again, the timing for this change coincides with the stupid censoring and banning going on over these.

What to do, what to do?? If all the really progressive thinkers leave KOS, then what will the DNC gain by courting what they already own?? Can most remaining progressive thinking folks over there see the changes I am referring to??

by NG on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:20:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 2)

Also available in orange.

by CabinGirl on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:15:54 PM EST

That's not orange. That's the color KOS (none / 1)

Kos named the whole national freakin' convention after himself. I would imagine he'll try to get that color named after himself as well, in the not too distant future.

"...Dammit, whatever happened to the concept of accountability for catastrophic failure?..." -Al Gore

by afs on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 11:29:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's not orange. That's the color KOS (none / 0)

Thanks very much for my first laugh of the day!

'Poverty is the worst form of violence'--Gandhi

by chocolate ink on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:54:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's not orange. That's the color KOS (none / 0)

In the near future maybe?

Well can I have my Toyota Pirus in Dkos orange or does that cost more.

by americanforliberty on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 04:52:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's not orange. That's the color KOS (none / 0)

to be fair to kos [something i don't recall doing at all recently] wasn't the whole shebang planned by a random group of people from all over the place who got his blessing to use the name? he didn't have a part of the initial planning and all that jazz from what i'm aware.

--
Albert Yee
Philadelphia, PA
http://dragonballyee.com/blog

by albert (dragonballyeeATgmail.com) on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 01:02:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 2)

Booman,
can you tell me if Warner is aware of Kos' former war against the DLC? You'de think that someone, either Kos, or Warner, changed their position. Has Warner moved further to the left as a goodwill gesture to Kos and his community, and the left in general? Or is Kos going back on his declaration?

"green grass and high tides forever"

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:16:32 PM EST

Kos's War vs. DLC Was Always About Tactics (4.00 / 6)

Kos always said nice things about "New Democrats" like Simon Rosenthal who were interested in embracing the "netroots."

The DLC is a nice big target in part because they're so wrong about everything: issues, ideology, strategies, tactics. Their self-imolation would have come around a lot more quickly had they not lucked into a connection with the one true political genius the Democrats have produced in the last generation: Bill Clinton (and I say this with little love lost for the man).

One of the nice side effects of attacking the DLC on their (idiotic) strategic ideas is that people who object to the DLC's ideology can easily be fooled into thinking that you, too, share their concerns. Actually progressive Democrats of the thank-you-sir-may-I-have-another school are always desperate to imagine that the party will suddenly start taking their ideas seriously.

It's high time that actual progressives begin to recognize that the "left" of the blogosphere has long been dominated by centrists. This is not a new development.

Become a Card-Carrying Green!

by GreenSooner (greensooner@NOSPAMintergate.com) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:18:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So... (none / 1)

...can we assume that with Jerome Armstrong by his side, Kos is now becoming reassured that Warner is tactically smart?

I do not think that Kos will officially endorse ANY candidate during the primaries. That's not smart, and Kos IS smart.

What seems smarter is to promote several candidates who all look like they've got a shot, and then claim success when and if one of them gets the nomination.

Right now, the Big Three for the 2008 nomination look like Edwards, Clinton, and Warner. But then again, when Al Gore endorsed Howard Dean and there was a huge push in the blogosphere for Dean, I thought Dean had a lock on the nomination--so pay no attention to me!

My favorite, of course, is Russ Feingold, but if Feingold doesn't run, or gets knocked out, my second choice (and a close one) is John Edwards, because of his populist, pro-working class stance.

A lot of people favor Mark Warner because he's a telegenic, centrist Southern governor--in other words, Bill Clinton II--and the historical record shows that former and current governors are much more likely to be elected President than former or incumbent senators.

Carter, Governor of Georgia
Reagan, Governor of California
Bush I, Incumbent Vice-President
Clinton, Governor of Arkansas
Bush II, Governor of Texas

As for Gore...I really don't think he's running again. Says he's done with running for elective office and I believe him.

Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?

by Man Without A Country on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 01:39:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Pretty Good Analysis of Political Choices... (none / 0)

...facing the Democrats in 2008.

What's missing, of course, is any sense (beyond your own, in your discussions of Feingold and Edwards) of what's actually good for the country.

This is the great absence at the heart of 90% of political discussions by Democrats for the last several decades. It's all strategy this, tactics that. What do you stand for?

Conservatives figured out in the early 1960s what they wanted and then set about achieving it politically by any means necessary. The goals may have changed over the years, but strategy and tactics have always been in the service of ideology and policy goals.

Become a Card-Carrying Green!

by GreenSooner (greensooner@NOSPAMintergate.com) on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 10:59:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pretty Good Analysis of Political Choices... (none / 0)

"Good of the country"?

That's crazy talk!

My heart is with Feingold. If he runs, I'll contribute money and work for him in whatever capacity can help him the most.

If he loses, and Edwards is still in the running, then that's where I'll go.

Feingold would be a principled, courageous President--he's a real-life Bartlett! Edwards has principles, too, but I will never forget Feingold's courage in being the ONLY Senator to vote against the "Patriot Act" and his tenacity in these past few years in trying to bring the outlaw Bush-Cheney administration to account.

Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?

by Man Without A Country on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 06:10:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 2)

Why on EARTH are you people puzzled?

Your centrist chickens are going to come home to roost.

Bet on it.

And Warner IS without ideology. Publicly expressed ideology, at any rate.

The perfect presidential candidate for the perfectly emptied blog.

When a good poker player is caught out in a mistake, he often tries to cover by acting "puzzled" as to what to do although it has already begun to dawn on him that he has fucked up this particular hand and will eventually have to fold.

That is what I am hearing, here.

'Fess up.

And live to play another hand.

A stronger one.

The DLC and its centrist "stay the course" position in Iraq is wrong, wrong, wrong.

You know it; I know it...hell, everybody with an ounce of sense knows it.

It is tactically wrong. An unwinnable battle.

It is STRATEGICALLY wrong. Economic imperialism has just about run its course, because them Injuns got repeating rifles now. Nuclear rifles.

And...dare I use the word on a political blog!!!???

MORALLY wrong.

Yup.

There. I went and said it.

Used the dreaded "M" word.

But what IS "morality", really, but the accumulated tactical and strategic wisdom of the wisest among us for many centuries?

Use tactics, choose strategies that are morally repugnant, and in the end Martin Luther King Jr.'s "arc of the moral universe"* is going to blow you AWAY on its course towards justice.

Believe it.

Or not.

As you must.

Later...

*"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." Martin Luther King Jr.

Yup.

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:33:13 PM EST

You know. People can be disgusted or (4.00 / 2)

taken aback or finding something distasteful without being SURPRISED OR PUZZLED OR PERPLEXED.

They can also be digesting bad food.

by Marisacat (Marisacat@aol.com) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:37:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You know. People can be disgusted or (none / 0)

But Marisacat...they ARE puzzled.

And so far...effectively muzzled as well by their awe at the bigtime money machines so plainly in operation there at YKos.

BooMan's post is FULL of puzzlement.

Of questions.

Like this.

... there can be no avoiding a controversy about the close relationship that is developing between Warner and Daily Kos. Warner was not only granted the keynote speech; prior to the speech he was allowed to pass out free Yearly Kos t-shirts with his face (not Markos's or Wesley Clark's, or FDR's, or Russ Feingold's, or Hillary Clinton's, or Armando's) superimposed on the front. And on the back, it says 'Forward Together' and 'Authorized and Paid for by Forward Together PAC.' That is Mark Warner's presidential political action committee. Then we were all subjected to a Kennedyesque five-minute canned campaign infomercial. Then Warner gave a well presented and well received speech, emphasizing a Dukakis-like technocratic competency that was striking (if one hadn't been expecting it) for its lack of ideology.

Simultaneously with this:

And this:

So...is Kos "endorsing" this man but not REALLY endorsing him? (Wink wink nudge nudge. Coy little bastid, ain't he?)

Or...what???

Is a puzzlement.

Is it not?

PsiFighter37 actually uses the word. "Quite simply, it is extremely puzzling indeed."

Supersoling's question. "Booman, can you tell me if Warner is aware of Kos' former war against the DLC? You'de think that someone, either Kos, or Warner, changed their position. Has Warner moved further to the left as a goodwill gesture to Kos and his community, and the left in general? Or is Kos going back on his declaration?"

Puzzle is as puzzle does.

Politics as usual.

Which got us INTO this mess in the first place.

Or...maybe it IS just a bad food-induced dream.

Only thing...?

I doubt it.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:57:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You know. People can be disgusted or (none / 1)

I was not thinking of Booman. Your post clearly refenced a undefined group.

Your tone toward "people", as tho "we", some vague multiple, are all junior to you and thus you must stop in the road and disabuse "us" of "our" naivete, or ignorance or or or or... it gets old.

"Bet on it".

Mostly I ignore it and read past your posts. Today I did not.

by Marisacat (Marisacat@aol.com) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 09:41:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You know. People can be disgusted or (none / 0)

I was referencing the people who had posted in the thread.

No more, no less.

YOU are the one who jumped further.

For good reasons?

Maybe.

And maybe you SHOULD have read the post.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:33:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 4)

If you're talking about me AG, I know the answer to my question above. I just want to hear Booman's take. Perplexed? Hardly.

"green grass and high tides forever"

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 09:00:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 0)

You do know the answer?

Tell me, please.

Has Warner moved further to the left as a goodwill gesture to Kos and his community? Is Kos going back on his declaration? Or is it a little of both.

Or...something MUCH more complicated.

I< am certainly perplexed.

How IS this game being played?

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:37:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 5)

All right, you cocky SOB ;o)

I really didn't want to have to explain my comment because it was a bit of an unfair setup question to Booman. But you being...well...you, you had to call me out and explain to everyone how ignorant I am.
What I wanted to know from Booman, him being a "Kossack" at heart was, why is he surprised that Markos looks like he's endorsing Warner, and by default the DLC, while not technically endorsing him, when he had previously declared war on the DLC. Well duh! Of course Markos never really declared war on anyone...except the true progressives and the true left that he needed to herd along in order to bolster his numbers and inflate his importance inside the beltway.

It's a damned shame I had to explain that to you seeing as I've been posting on this site for about a year now and my political views should be pretty well known by now. Then again, I suppose it's a lot to ask of you to stop yacking, and flapping your gums at everyone else long enough to see what's going on right under your nose here.

Peace

"green grass and high tides forever"

by supersoling (colorsplash62@optonline.net) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:50:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 0)

Frankly, I think that BooMann's "Kossackness" is under heavy stress right now.

Really.

And as far as my "knowing" what people are thinking...well, I must claim to take the position of being a literalist.

What you say is what I get.

What you...or anyone else...said yesterday?

Old news.

Particularly on a blog situation where essentially NO ONE is truly held accountable. Minds and positions change, as do blog names. NO ONE is who they say they are. Not totally. And when people ARE held accountable to some degree (like Armando's unfortunate recent adventures with the outing of his corporate client list) there is MUCH gnashing of collective teeth.

Not that you personally are guilty of this.

It's just blogworld in general.

So when someone writes something, unless they make DAMNED clear that they are spoofing...I just take them at their word.

Sorry..

I didn't mean to offend.

I just don't know any other way to deal with the situation.

Thanks for the clarification.
(If that's what it was, of course...) ()

Later...

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:41:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 0)

Arthur, can I just say that it's very hard for me to read a succession of one-word paragraphs? I know that sounds snarky but seriously, the way you format things has stopped me from wanting to read what you write.

Take that for what it's worth, which may be absolutely nothing.

"History is ruthless, and will never flatter anybody." Zhou Enlai

by Other Lisa (redandexpert at that mega-ISP called yahoo.) on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 04:05:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 0)

Me, too, Arthur.

My Website

by kansas on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 09:15:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 0)

One

Word

Paragraphs

CAN be a drag.

Mine average out to about fifteen.

I don't know what to say. I write 'em like I hear 'em.

I have tried to consciously stop myself from wrting short paragraphs, but every time I do, my writing seems tggo me to be very ...cluttered. Like this paragraph. A bunch of discrete thoughts, all bundled up in a corral someplace. It's just not natural. Not to me, anyway. And as that truly great American thinker Duke Ellington once said, "I don't pursue anything. The only thing I always answer is my own impulse."

My own impulse is to write in shrot sentences, most of the time.

Leave 'em room to breathe.

So I do.

It's about rhythm.

Really.

I played a latin-jazz concert Friday where the bandleader tried to get the entire...non-Hispanic, mostly...audience to clap clavé. (Look it up if you do not know what clavé is. Here is a good starter. You really should at least be cognizant of its existence, seeing as how it is the absolute, basic root of almost all Caribbean-based musics and can be found in almost all African musics as well.) Clavé is a VERY simnple rhythm, and most of the audience got somewhere very close to it in a short period of time.

But there was a small percentage of the people...maybe 5%, maybe less...that absolutely, positively could not deal with it. Not that they weren't trying. You've heard of the concept of tone deaf? Well...they were rhythm deaf.

Now I personally think that this condition, unless due to a neurological miswiring or disease of some sort, can be fixed. But it is a large and difficult task, having to do with conditioning and physical/emotional/mental blocking that happens in childhood.

Semi-President Reagan suffered from it, too.

Arrhythmia of the soul.

I watched himn try to clap on the offbeat at a gospel concert.

No go.

Looked like a bird with a broken wing trying to fly.

Sad to see.

Well...it has been my impression that about 3-5% of the people who read what I write have a complaint about my "short paragraphs".

Hmmmm...

That's all I have to say.

Sorry that you do not like my style.

Really.

But...

You can please all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time...awwwwww, YOU know...!!!

So I will continue to write it as I hear it.

So it goes.

Later...

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 10:04:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 1)

Aw, Arthur, I'm sorry. I shouldn't have criticized your style of writing. It's yours and you have a perfect right to express yourself however you want to. And you're right, I do know. Besides, plenty of people don't like how I write, either, and naturally I think they're dumbfucks, too. :) Er, I mean, they suffer, poor things, from "arrhythmia of the soul." I'm gonna use that one!

Let your words breathe however they need to. I mean that.

My Website

by kansas on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 11:32:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 1)

Sorry - again, I don't intend snark here, and yeah, I don't want to play language cop and tell people how to write. This is just my reaction as a reader - and I'm only one reader.

"History is ruthless, and will never flatter anybody." Zhou Enlai

by Other Lisa (redandexpert at that mega-ISP called yahoo.) on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 04:27:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 0)

Arthur you should be a poet. They often have th esmae feeling you do about white space on the page, rhthym, etc.

Obama is a Patriot

by Steven D on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 06:07:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 3)

Well surprise, surprise, surprise.....Gomer Pyle. Why is it that the only game plan is that a reincarnation of a centrist democrat, like President Clinton, can win the presidency. I would suppose with all the "illegalities" heaped upon this nation for the last 8 years we need a true lefty in the White House..One America like J.E. or Russ Fiengold. But the true test of the new centrist Dkos is whether he can anty up the money from his web-site.

With so many of use in exile at the pond, it will take a least two post this time around instead just one in orange.

by americanforliberty on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:44:16 PM EST

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 9)

none of this should be a suprise. Kos is not a liberal. He can't even really be called a "progressive". He's a Nixonian, a Rockefellar Republican, and he's going to use that website to build a consensus for more of the same bullshit embrace of corporations and the fucking worst influences of the south.

"Whenever a Voice of Moderation addresses liberals, its sole purpose is to stomp out any real sign of life." - James Wolcott

by Madman in the Marketplace on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:52:12 PM EST

Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 4)

It appears that Kos is dangerously close to becoming that which he was opposed to...Walt Kelly, via Pogo may have described it best:

We have met the enemy and he is us.

I find it interesting considering who was, or was not, invited to speak. Most noticeably, the absence of Feingold, whose positions significantly more in line with my own than Warner's.

We shall see.

lTMF'sA...the revolution will not be televised...Peace

by dada on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:59:45 PM EST

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 5)

Feingold was bringing down the house in LaCrosse, WI at the state Democratic Party convention.

"Whenever a Voice of Moderation addresses liberals, its sole purpose is to stomp out any real sign of life." - James Wolcott

by Madman in the Marketplace on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 10:13:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 5)

I just finished looking through Warner's "positions" on the issues. Pretty slim pickings, if this link is remotely credible.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Mark_Warner.htm

Is it 2009 yet?

by Teacher Toni (tacoralatyahoodotcom) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 09:05:41 PM EST

I've seen this before (4.00 / 8)

The revolutionaries, the anti-establishment, how they rant and rave against those they oppose... until they become them.

by sjct on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 09:05:41 PM EST

Re: I've seen this before (4.00 / 5)

. . . Because the little kid inside REALLY wanted a piece of that pie, not a pie of his or her own. These people, shasing after crumbs of the Establishment by using Progressives and Leftists to launch their careers.

So true, sjct, so true.

Share. Share resources, share delight, share burdens, share the healing. Sharing will bring us back from mass suicide. www.share-international.org

by Isis on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 09:15:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I've seen this before (none / 1)

I was there with BooMan, and I'd have to agree. Markos was just gleeful, like a kid in a candy store.

Fear will keep the local systems in line. -Grand Moff Tarkin Survivor Left Blogistan

by boran2 (blogistan@yahoo.com) on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:03:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Gore was/is NOT a 'DLC-Candidate' (4.00 / 2)

Gore was NOT a 'DLC-Candidate' in 2000 and he will NOT be one if he runs in 2008.

Why do I say that?

The "Hyde Park Declaration" appears DLC's guiding light for the 21st century.

DLC | Key Document | August 1, 2000
The Hyde Park Declaration: A Statement of Principles and a Policy Agenda for the 21st Century

Guess what? It makes NO mention whatsoever of Al Gore, nor was he a signitory to the document. And that was in middle of his own presidential campaign. A very telling sign that Gore parted ways with the DLC Core establishment by then.

Furthermore, Gore endorsed Dean in 2004, the un-DLC candidate that year (and Feingold didn't), hence it would be inane to think that he would be a "DLC candidate" in 2008.

I strongly disagree with your claim that Gore was/is a "DLC candidate".

~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~

I call for a Gore-led "big Tent", where everyone, including Dems, Inds, Greens, Libertrains and other 3rd parties, DLC, principled Republicans are all welcome to come join in consensus, and help resuscitate our Democracy.

by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 09:24:26 PM EST

Yeah, back then he was. (none / 1)

You forget--Gore was a Senator from TN. It's one of the reasons he was successfully paired with Clinton--not a liberal. The DLC, regardless of what document he did or didn't sign, wasn't going to abandon Gore, who was the extension of their greatest success, Clinton. They also had Lieberman on the ticket--no liberal to be found. (Though I do believe he was always an environmentalist, he, through Tipper, did those PMRC/OMG...quick!--label the music from unsuspecting children stuff.)

The DLC, from its very beginning, was all about "taking control" from liberals to more conservative (ahem, moderate) and/or southern Dem members. It's had various forms, from Southern Dem protection cmte (didn't work); to protector of all things free trade (which worked well, but further put nail into coffin re: 1st goal); to trying to be the party of the suburbs to its latest costume...presidential weigh-station.

All that said though...he likely stopped being a DLCer on oh about ... January 20, 2001.

Can't hear ya, Peach!

by AP on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:46:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yeah, back then he was. (none / 1)

All that said though...he likely stopped being a DLCer on oh about ... January 20, 2001.

Quite so...and not until and sometimes he regresses (This past week I received a solicitation from the Bob Casey Campaign with a reply envelope I intend to use although I will not be sending money in it. Al Gore was letting them use his name.
And Al Gore was most definitely DLC and indeed was one of the founding members.

by the other colleen on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 01:09:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

and hence he should any party member with winning the general election.

As far as I know:

Gore helped all party institutions (DNC, DSCC, DCCC), by doing fundraisers and allowing them to use his name for raising funds. In the case of the DCCC, Gore specifically asked them to use the funds generated to help only those that are willing to help with passing legislation to combat global warming. The DCCC said that the Gore campaign was the most successful in its history.
He may now be helping individual party nominees, perhaps with similar understanding with them about global warming.

This past week I received a solicitation from the Bob Casey Campaign.

The key here is "past week". The Pennsylvania primary was over on May 16th:

Pennsylvania
Elections for Statewide offices and Congress
Primary: Tuesday 16 May 2006
General Election: Tuesday 7 November 2006

which means that Casey IS the Dem. party nominee for the general election. Gore should help any party nominee that asks for his help.

So, your episode only proves that Gore is a Democrat.

Al From founded the DLC, and Bill Clinton was its first Chairman. IMO, Bill Clinton used it to launch his own pres. campaign. Neither Bill nor Gore had much do with them during their admin, because both are much better policy wonk than all of the DLC put together.

Gore's lifetime record shows him to be a Hard Core Populist, hardly a DLC-type: Gore is a "Hard Core Populist" according to issues2000.org.

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 11:48:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

and hence he should any party member with winning the general election.

I'm assuming that you left out the word 'back' or 'support'.
I object to being used by the Democratic party in this manner. I don't need a lecture about the established fact that Bob Casey is the nominee as I'm well aware of that fact. Here's some facts you don't know: I don't live in PA. I have supported Democrats for years because they tell me they would not back vile little fundie men like Bob Casey or vote to confirm vile little fundie men like Alito.
I'm disappointed in Al Gore, pissed as hell the DSCC and disappointed in the Democratic party and, believe me, I am the last person the fucking Bob Casey campaign should be sending fundraising solicitations to.

Al From founded the DLC, and Bill Clinton was its first Chairman.

Nevertheless, a group of mainly southern pols founded the DLC, Al Gore was one of them. I could find you the list or you could google it. If you wish to be helpful and informative and impress me with your knowledge of politics and the DLC provide me with the complete list of their funding sources the past 10 years.

by the other colleen on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:18:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

Did the solitication come from DSCC?

In any event, Casey is better than Santorum, and since he has a shot at winning and that would be a pickup, he should now be supported. If you didn't like him so much, did you contribute to one of his primary challengers?

Yes, I think that Gore was one of original members of the DLC, but the DLC itself was founded by Al From, which seemed to have little to do with Gore in his "Hyde Park Declaration" in 2000.

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:34:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

Did the solitication come from DSCC?

I believe I was specific about where the solicitation came from.

In any event, Casey is better than Santorum, and since he has a shot at winning and that would be a pickup, he should now be supported. If you didn't like him so much, did you contribute to one of his primary challengers

OK, here's a couple of other things you appear to be unaware of. The first is that how I spend my money and, in this forum, who I send political contributions to, is none of your business. I mean really, where do you get off demanding information like that about me, and in bold too? The 2nd thing you need to know is that you aren't someone who has any business whatsoever telling me who I should or should not support politically. What's the matter with you?

by the other colleen on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:44:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

I believe I was specific about where the solicitation came from.

You said two contradictory things: 1) you got a solicitation from Casey (which could have been directed via DSCC, and hence my question was not stupid) 2) you don't live in PA.

Why would Casey run around soliciting funds form people not living in PA, unless you signed up for somethign somewhere?

No, my point was that, primaries are the way to make the Democratic nominees more progressive. So, if you disliked Casey so much, and you're a Democrat, it is natural to expect you to support one of his primary opponents.

OTOH. if you're not a Democrat, then you have no business criticizing Gore for helping one of his party nominees.

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:55:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 1)

Why would Casey run around soliciting funds from people not living in PA,

For the same reason Harold Ford did so, because he's a crappy candidate who won't recieve much if any help from significant blocs of those of us who have, in the past, voted for Democrats.

No, my point was that, primaries are the way to make the Democratic nominees more progressive

Than that was the point you should have made rather than demand to know who I contributed money to. I always regard this focused interest in how other people spend their political money as a revealing trait of online operatives who, after all, come here to manipulate and lecture rather than discuss politics. I engage in this activity for discussion.

OTOH. if you're not a Democrat, then you have no business criticizing Gore for helping one of his party nominees.

I'm thinking you might do better posting at DK where ignorance and terminal arrogance are an accepted substitute for actual conversation.

by the other colleen on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 01:12:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 1)

I'm thinking you might do better posting at DK where ignorance and terminal arrogance are an accepted substitute for actual conversation.

I think that direct personal attack shows who is being arrogant. After having attacked me about not telling you what to do (which I didn't in the strict sense, as I clarified), why are you telling me what to do?

I am here for discussion, and finding/telling the truth, and setting the record straight, when other aren't doing the same.

You will find me here at the very least, if things are said about Al Gore that are not true (he's suffered enough from 7 years of specious and untrue mud slinging by every Tom, Dick and Harry out there).

Unless Booman tells me not to frequent here, I'll be stopping by :)

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 01:23:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 1)

After having attacked me about not telling you what to do (which I didn't in the strict sense, as I clarified), why are you telling me what to do?

I'm certainly not telling you what to do, I was suggesting that DK might be a better fit. My objection wasn't so much to your repeatedly telling me what my political priorities should be (although that's pretty offensive) my objection was to a direct question
in bold
asking about where I had spent money I earned. And this you indeed do in every sense including the strict.
This was an experience I've had on DK many times. I regard demands for money, questions about donations and queries about any aspect of my personal, professional or financial life as rude and none of anyone's business, much less the business of a complete stranger. This isn't an experience I have had here before today and I would hope that these sorts of queries don't become the norm here.

if things are said about Al Gore that are not true

I said nothing that was untrue and wasn't slinging mud at Gore either. I said I was disappointed in him and I am. Gore does not need to sully his good name providing liberal cover for that piece of crap.

by the other colleen on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 03:59:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

I said this:

In any event, Casey is better than Santorum, and since he has a shot at winning and that would be a pickup, he should now be supported. If you didn't like him so much, did you contribute to one of his primary challengers?

That was a rhetorical question. It wa NOT a query, and I am sorry if it came across that way.

And the word "contribute" was also a slip of tongue actually, I actually meant "support" (which could also be moral support), as it becomes clearly when I explained what I meant:

No, my point was that, primaries are the way to make the Democratic nominees more progressive. So, if you disliked Casey so much, and you're a Democrat, it is natural to expect you to support one of his primary opponents.
OTOH. if you're not a Democrat, then you have no business criticizing Gore for helping one of his party nominees.

Please see my comment below.

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 04:25:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

I am sorry

I accept your apology and thank you for taking the time to clarify.

by the other colleen on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 04:49:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 1)

I'm thinking you might do better posting at DK where ignorance and terminal arrogance are an accepted substitute for actual conversation.

I am expecting your apology for the above. Because by then I had already clarified myself.

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 05:29:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

That would be dishonest of me. First I'm pretty sure that the notion that your 'clarification' was reasonable and adequate is something I would have to agree to and I don't. For another I'm sincere in my desire to not see this blog become like DK and most evidence is that you would prefer to see it head as far south as DK has.
Because there have been so many fellows coming over here trying to start fights I've become a bit testy and I do apologise for any overreaction on my part. I think I'll allow the community here to deal with you from now on.

by the other colleen on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 10:31:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Al Gore is a leader of the party (none / 0)

As long as everyone deals with well sourced facts and accurate characterizations, things will be just fine.

by NeuvoLiberal on Mon Jun 12th, 2006 at 09:56:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

friends, eh? (none / 1)

What say, we start anew, and agree to be friendly to each other henceforth?

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 01:32:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 3)

Sooner or later everybody becomes either Pat Garrett or Billy the Kid. This is because everyone must sooner or later come to terms with 'the man', that is, the power structure that is all around us. And you either end up giving it the old hug, like the famous picture of Sammy Davis Jr hugging Nixon which put a bit of a crimp in Sammy's career in the 70s, or you shoot it out. We all do it sooner or later; on the big stage of the world if we're famous, or the little stage of our lives if we're not. Markos' embrace of Warner is part of his rise to power and prominence and claims that he is not responsible for Warner's keynote speech, tee shirt etc, wear a little thin. One can only credibly hide behind 'the people' for so long. Such a non-endorsement-endorsement is politics as usual. And why shouldn't Markos push Warner? It mutually beneficial. Most important reason is rule number one of Power. you can only keep power if you use it.

by moon in the house of moe on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 09:24:27 PM EST

Respectfully Call Bullshit (4.00 / 4)

In watching the Orange Empire grow over the past couple of years, there has been a palpable feeling of the site shifting from populism to centrism.

Slowly but surely, at a pace that few noticed, Kos has been distancing himself and the rest of the front page from the chattel who comprise most of his true following.

And while it's true that in the world of politics there exists a culture of 'good ol' boy-ism' and back-scratching that any politician learns to compromise with, Markos Moulitsas is not a politician.

Markos' original genius was in creating a central location of support and organization in which a grassroots movement could be born. The power of Markos has always been with the people who inhabitied his website, not in with rubbing elbows with friends in high places.

Sadly, when Markos started reaching a point of astounding success he chose to start turning his back on those who's shoulders he stood on. First it was the CT crowd. That was ok, who was going to miss them? Next, it was the feminist set successfully shed with the Pie wars. Then just recently and perhaps not uncoincidentally, Armando and his bands of troll hunting thugs were unleashed on the masses to take care of anyone else who was not cared for, conveniently enough while markos was away from the site.

The sad truth is, Markos met with the proverbial fork in the road, and unfortunately he chose the path most traveled.

Markos chose the path of more-of-the-sameism, politics as usual, compromise to get ahead path that most politicos end up going down and when they finally reach a point where they have the power to do good, the point they kept telling themselves they were compromising to get to, that is the chance to do some good, they then too late realize their hands have been tied neatly and tightly behind them during that long process of selling out their principles. Irrevelant and hopeless, like soulless zombies they travel the political talk show circuit, hawking their latest screed while trying in vain to remember how and why they got there.

In short, he blew it.

Markos forgot that the power was with the people. He could have used that power for good and instead he did what most do. He sold out.

Markos is dead to me.

There was a reason that politicians frequented his website and that was because the site was a giant ATM machine. Markos let it all this go to his head and many of us were used in the process of unleashing another ghastly beast on the political process.. May God have mercy on our souls.

If Booman becomes as popular, this site will become an ATM too, and the politicians will show up here next.

What will we do then?

for a more subversive take on the world visit nowhereweb

by Brian Nowhere on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 10:18:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Disagree, in Part (4.00 / 6)

I think dKos has changed for the worse, and I'd more or less endorse your chronology of that deterioration.

But I think Kos is what he's always been: a fairly hip Democratic centrist. I don't think anyone who's actually paid attention to Kos's stands on positions, favorite candidates, rhetoric, etc. from the start could reach any other conclusion. Kos never sold out. He's fighting for what he always believed in.

I do think there's a way in which dKos has become much more ideologically unified behind Kos's brand of centrism. Partly that was always Kos's vision for the site. Partly it was the inevitable result of controversies resolved in ways that made sense to someone with Kos's political beliefs (the Pie Wars being a grand example, but one could point to the infamous anti-hippy post on the Iraq War, or all the fearmongering about the CT crowd).

I don't think any of this will effect the Democratic Party one way or another. It's a centrist juggernaut that would need a much, much bigger shock to move it off its present, slow and steady rightward course.

But I do hope we see the emergence of a more vital, nonpartisan, truly left side of the blogosphere. It's now clear that Democratic big tentism ain't gonna do the trick.

Become a Card-Carrying Green!

by GreenSooner (greensooner@NOSPAMintergate.com) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:28:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh sure.. (4.00 / 4)

Well when you use logic and rational thought it all sounds so, well...right. You are causing me to rethink my position..stop it. stop it now!

Seriously, after I wrote what I wrote above ,I started thinking I may have been a bit harsh in my treatment of Markos. I started thinking of the positive things that Markos has done for democrats, and the commitment he has shown to bringing support and $$ to some really deserving candidates. He has done positive things and I made no mention of that and that was not fair.

This is the problem with being a liberal..a life of always grappling with multiple facets of most any given issue (I propose we name this affliction Kerry's Disease).

That said, I guess what irks me is that so many along the way were fooled into thinking they were contributing to Kos' success because they believed that the Daily Kos stood for the freedom of ideas and the importance of debate. Who knew all along he was only cleverly crafting and whittling away at his following to make it more conform to his own ideology?

I think this was mainly due to the presence of the Recommended Diaries feature. When I first encountered this I thought, "What better way for the democratic party to find direction and purpose than to hash out thoughts, ideas and difficult issues through the democratic process itself?"

At some point, I guess the democratic process seemed to become inconvenient to Kos' own particular brand of politics, as after the 04 election, voting fraud was number one on the charts for weeks on end, and rightfully so IMHO. It's still a major problem that I pray does not come back to bite us all in the asses.
Then came the Pie Wars, CT bannings (I forgot about the Hippie Dissing) and so on ad infinitum and the rest is history as they say.

Anyhoo, I feel in danger here of rambling on now. This is a difficult and complex subject.

Suffice it to say GreenSooner, I am impressed by your eloquence and now find it necessary to give the matter more thought...All i can say is that the Kos experience has left a foul taste in my mouth, like I'm not quite sure what the fuck I just ate.

for a more subversive take on the world visit nowhereweb

by Brian Nowhere on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:30:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Respectfully Call Bullshit (none / 0)

Respectfully request you read me again. I'm saying something similar. Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid were friends in the wild west (read progressives). Pat Garrett (Markos) went to work for the establishment and hunted down Billy (progressive kossers) and supposedly killed him (there are rumors he lived). I believe we're on the same wavelength. Correct me if I misread you.

by moon in the house of moe on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 10:44:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Respectfully Call Bullshit (4.00 / 2)

Well, I felt the timbre of your statement seemed to imply that making compromises are neccessary to obtaining much needed power.

My feeling is that compromising your principles to obtain power may lead to power for ones own career, but it is deathly hazardous to a grassroots cause.

To me it's about staying true to grass roots principles. When you have people behind you, politicians listen.

If you don't selll them down the river, you can win.

Correct me if I am the one mistaken.

for a more subversive take on the world visit nowhereweb

by Brian Nowhere on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 10:54:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Respectfully Call Bullshit (4.00 / 3)

I was saying compromises of the kind which markos seems to be making, lead to personal power and are hazerdous to a grassroots movement. Free speech and a free press are under serious attack in the U.S. under bush, and so I was surprised when there were suddenly forbidden topics on kos - election fraud and now I've learned, 9/11 conspiricy theories. Even though it's stated ad infinitum that it's kos' site and he makes the rules, or go elsewhere etc, it still was a shock. The reason, because you'd expect the answer to suppression of speech under bush is free speech in a political blog. Speech supression on kos is part of his mainstreaming himself. So there you have it.

by moon in the house of moe on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:17:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I stand corrected (none / 0)

I guess i was wayyy off the mark then and you have my regrets.

I agree with everything you just said and I must also admit to BWWLB... Blogging while watching Lewis Black

for a more subversive take on the world visit nowhereweb

by Brian Nowhere on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:35:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 4)

I generally agree, BooMan. The courtship between Markos and Warner is something that needs watching.

I thought the speech was fairly well received but there was grumbling in my part of the room too. And I noticed a couple of tables that refused to give Warner the obligatory standing ovation at the end. I thought maybe they were Clark people.

Warner came across as a nice, hard working guy. I'm willing to bet he's given this speech a number of times; and yet he managed to sound utterly sincere and somewhat conversational in tone. It wasn't a rallying speech full of lines meant to bring the crowd to their feet, like Barbara Boxer's yesterday and Howard Dean's this morning. It was a speech that really seemed meant to be given to a group of rural, western or midwestern Democrats - the kind that don't talk much, don't show much emotion and take a wait-and-see attitude with candidates. I find it somewhat puzzling that he thought he could give that kind of speech to us - but as I said he seemed sincere. So maybe that's just how he is.

His articulation of rural problems (lack of opportunity and good schools) and his belief that government could and should help solve those problems was particularly effective. His catch-phrase "no one should be forced to leave their hometown" struck me as something that would play really well with middle America.

Personally, I was somewhat unmoved by the speech. But I think that people who don't spend their day thinking through political issues would find it comforting and hopeful. I don't think anyone should underestimate Warner's chances.

I also thought the T-shirt was a little over the top -- although I'd rather have Warner's face than Markos' face. ;)

Help me raise money for Jay Nixon, the next Democratic governor of Missouri

by maryb2004 on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 09:57:12 PM EST

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 2)

And Warner is going to be so popular w/MI voters and the UAW. NOT!

Great job of counting electoral votes Markos!

"First, they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win." Mahatma Gandhi

by Street Kid on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 10:59:42 PM EST

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 1)

Something like this had to happen. I know little about Warner other than that like Bill Clinton he has been a successful Dem governor in a Red state. I have a favorite candidate (more than one)and it isn't Warner. But I know from long experience that we will not get the candidate of our choice. The last time that happened was with Adlai Stevenson, whom I barely remember. As progressives we are part of the party, and the best part, the part that keeps it honest. But we are not going to be or run the Democratic party unless it becomes Stalinist or something like the present-day Republican Party. We are or should be reality-based. That means understanding that what we know is right and what we think should be done won't always happen.

What we need are red lines. Habeas Corpus is a red line. The doctrine of pre-emptive war should also be a red line, since it induces war crimes. Iraq is probably a bright pink line, because the present administration has left us with unpalatable alternatives. The model here has got tobe Mendes-France, who brought France out of Indochina, and is generally considered to be the best Prime Minister in post-war France. After that we have various tones of pink.

My point is that when a movement becomes important, as ours as, we have to deal. Not all of us, and I think that those who don't want to deal should scream their views as loud as they can. But in the end, we have to go with the old, but true, maxim. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. And five years of thug government has shown us who the true enemy of the United States is.

Knut

by Knut Wicksell (b_didnn@hotmail.ca) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:21:46 PM EST

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 5)

The only thing that sickens me more than the mantle "YearlyKos" is the media/blogger coverage proclaiming it the First-Of-Many.

I can't help wondering how many more people would be in attendance this weekend if the name Kos were not in the title of the event. How many others would dearly love to convene with progressive bloggers but would sooner be caught dead than in attendance at anything bearing Markos' name?

I don't begrudge him personally - okay, maybe a little - but as a particularly visible vanguard, DailyKos is a bitter disappointment.

On the surface we see a site dedicated at least nominally to democratic ideals.

But beneath that lurks a shadow side operating from completely antithetical principles and practices - the term neo-fascism springs to mind - which many of us know only through particularly ugly personal experiences. These manifest variously and with impacts ranging from insignificant to monstrous. I suppose it is the all-too-predictable result of too much power in the hands of ambitious and immature personalities, but it is still a disappointment and I am loathe to associate with it in any way.

Here's what I've been thinking all weekend: If this gathering were called Blogressives 2006, I would be in Las Vegas right now.

Then again, if it were called Blogressives 2006 it wouldn't be in Las Vegas, would it?

by Only Love Prevails on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 05:28:32 AM EST

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (4.00 / 2)

The Kos is, at best, a mildly liberal/centrist site. It's joined at the hip to the Dems. It serves to rally Democrat support for whoever they run.

We can do better. We better!

by Jaded Prole (partisanpoet@excite.com) on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 01:57:28 PM EST

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy (none / 0)

Well, it was only their first date. They're not going steady yet.

Fear will keep the local systems in line. -Grand Moff Tarkin Survivor Left Blogistan

by boran2 (blogistan@yahoo.com) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 07:48:34 PM EST

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little (4.00 / 4)

I am trying not to say something vulgar.

by Marisacat (Marisacat@aol.com) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:07:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little (none / 1)

It's so hard.

by latanawi on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:12:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Markos and Warner are Getting a Little (none / 1)

And there are so many choices for something to say...

by CabinGirl on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 08:13:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Edwards, DLC, IWR and the netroots (none / 1)

Booman: I should point out that Edwards may have had strong DLC ties while in the senate, since you seem to be unaware of it when you declare "John Edwards and Russ Feingold are going to be the only non-DLC candidates with a prayer of winning",

Edwards was declared as one of the co-founders of the Senate "New" Democrat Coalition (which is considered the "congressional arm" of the DLC, and is affiliated with the DLC under the "New" Democrat Movement) in this DLC document:

DLC Update | March 13, 2000
New Dems Organize in Senate
Though U.S. Senators have always played a key role in the DLC and the New Democrat movement, we're pleased to see that nine senators have taken the formal step of organizing a New Democrat Coalition to work with the existing 64-member NDC in the House. The founding members of the Senate NDC include: Joe Lieberman (CT), Evan Bayh (IN), Mary Laundrieu (LA), John Edwards (NC), John Breaux (LA), Chuck Robb (VA), Blanche Lambert Lincoln (AR), Bob Kerrey (NE) and Bob Graham (FL).
It's also significant that key members of both House and Senate NDCs held a press conference last week to announce the formal introduction of the New Democrat education reauthorization bill sponsored by Senators Lieberman, Bayh and Landrieu, which originated at the DLC's affiliated think tank, the Progressive Policy Institute. We hope it will become the basis for a key reform of federal education policy this year. Joining the three Senate sponsors at the press conference were Senators Breaux, Lincoln, and Herb Kohl (WI), and Representatives Cal Dooley (CA), Adam Smith (WA), Joe Hoeffel (PA) and Jim Maloney (CT).
Both developments were big, and good news, for New Democrats.

However, in a later document on the same, his name is missing:

DLC | Overview | December 1, 2001
About the Senate New Democrat Coalition
Senators Evan Bayh (IN), Bob Graham (FL), Mary Landrieu (LA), Joe Lieberman (CT) and Blanche Lincoln (AR) founded the Senate New Democrat Coalition (SNDC) in the spring of 2000 to provide a unified voice in the U.S. Senate for progressive ideas, mainstream values, and innovative, market-based policy solutions.
In just over a year, the SNDC has quickly become the strongest and most unified Democratic group in the Senate. With long-time leaders like John Breaux (LA), and a strong class of freshman from the class of 2000 -- including Jean Carnahan (MO), Tom Carper (DE), Ben Nelson (NE), Bill Nelson (FL) and Debbie Stabenow (MI) -- the SNDC's ranks have expanded to 20 members.

DKos denizen zt155 claimed that Edwards was a member of the DLC during his senate career (and I have seen others make the same claim).

Another piece of circumstantial implication that Edwards may have been closely associated with the DLC comes from the fact that the other Democrats that co-sponsored Lieberman's IWR S.J. 46 (as did Edwards) were all, reportedly, members of the DLC: Lieberman, Bayh, Baucus, Breaux, Landrieu. Note that Daschle and Gephardt also were pimping some versions of the DLC, and they were members of the DLC as well.

It has been said the idea that the Dems should side with Bush on Iraq so that that issue would be neutralized and the Dems can then win based on "kitchen table issues" came from the DLC. Several writing by people associated with the DLC support the Iraq invasion. It is these things that me look at them with suspicion, and not simple membership in the DLC.

For example, Rep. Rush Holt (who opposed the war), and was Princeton physics prof. before running for office would be a strong progressive by most measures, and he is a DLC member, apparently (see zt155's diary).

Bottom line: we in the netroots should be weary of (and reject) DLC's foreign policy prescriptions going forward, but the rest of what they should be considered one point of view among several other within the party.

by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 10:58:19 PM EST

This Victory of "Centrism" (4.00 / 3)

Back in the early 1970s, Richard Nixon famously said that "we're all Keynesians now." Well, today, leading Democrat could truly say "we're all centrists now." The internal party politics of the DLC label (and its rejection by such ex-DLCers as Edwards and Dean) has much more to do with style, strategy, and branding than ideology.

If you want to know what the actual leftwing of the party looks (or looked) like, study the Jackson campaigns of '84 and '88, or the Kucinich campaign of '04.

Become a Card-Carrying Green!

by GreenSooner (greensooner@NOSPAMintergate.com) on Sat Jun 10th, 2006 at 11:32:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am generally an 'anti-labelist' (4.00 / 2)

I am generally an anti-labelist

The terms "left", "right", "center", "third way", are all mere labels.

Sensible policy is almost self-evident, except on deeply cultural issues, where people bring in elements of faith, and even there, some mutual respect and understanding tends to help figure out good policy that we can all live with, by and large.

The following summarizes my political philosophy:

A Common Sense/Common Good Progressive Framework (CSCGPF)

Labels like "left", "right", "center" are meaningless. Generally speaking, ideologies are also wedges that exist to divide people. Sensible policy need bear no labels nor adhere to preset ideologies.

If people sit down to debate amicably and rationally, then they tend to find solutions that can work in everyone's interest, i.e. for "common good".

Sometimes the answers come from "common sense", eg. that it is a good idea to balance checkbooks and budgets.

Sometimes better answers come from rigorous logical and scientific analysis, eg, "how best to avert global warming" or "how best to apportion a budget".

It is a fundamental precept that everyone is born to live and be free to the degree that they do not infringe on others' freedoms and honor the responsibilities voluntarily assumed.

I find that Gore and Dean come closest to my way of thinking policy and politics.

by NeuvoLiberal on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 12:04:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Problems with CSCGPF (none / 0)

I'm all in favor of moving beyond current definitions of "left," "right," "center," etc. Like all political terms, these ones are much more fluid and contingent than we usually give them credit for being. However, ideology serves a vital political function of mobilizing voters and aggregating policy positions. Pretending that it doesn't or simply wishing that it would go away is a recipe for political defeat and will always remain so. Always beware of folks who tell you they don't have an ideology. Usually they're just trying to sell you one on the sly.
Explain our current Congress, or just about any of our state legislatures. People have interests, prejudices, and agendas. And there are rarely solutions that work in everyone's interests, especially in the short run. The current system provides special privileges to people who are members of certain class, racial, gender, and sexuality (among other) groups. In a more equitable situation, those in these privileged groups will be less well off in certain ways (though I believe we all benefit from a more just world. PHMT as they say). To take one very simple example: the Estate Tax is an eminently just form of taxation. But the very rich are worse off because of it.
What seems like "common sense" is not always sensible. Balanced budget absolutism, for example, makes it impossible for the government to pump prime the economy in times of recession. And since those making the decisions come overwhelmingly from certain privileged groups (see #2 above), their "common sense" is often only makes sense from the point of view of certain social positions.
Yes. But just because better answers come from these things doesn't mean they get adopted. Look at the politics of global warming. The Clinton/Gore administration never even raised the CAFE standards during their eight years in office, and were utterly incapable of getting the Senate to even seriously consider the extremely modest Kyoto Accords. Often rigorous and logical analysis leads to radical conclusions, that require the same sort of political actions that any radical proposal requires. Certainly a solution to global climate change fits this description. I'd say our national healthcare crisis does, too.
I agree. The devil, however, is in the details.

Become a Card-Carrying Green!

by GreenSooner (greensooner@NOSPAMintergate.com) on Sun Jun 11th, 2006 at 11:14:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

We judge politicians by their actions (none / 1)

John Edwards has a very good pro-working class voting record in the Senate, and during his 2004 campaign, adopted a version of Gore's 2000 slogan, "The Powerful v. the People".

For the record: John Edwards' lifetime ADA (Americans for Democratic Action) rating was 81 (it's a measure of liberalism from a scale of 0 to 100).

For comparison:

John Kerry had a 92% lifetime ADA rating in 2004.

Walter Mondale had a 90% lifetime ADA rating as a senator.

Teddy Kennedy has a 90% lifetime ADA rating as of 2005.

Senator Feinstein of California has a lifetime ADA rating of 86%, while Senator Boxer (bless her) has a lifetime ADA rating of 96%!!!

Senator Lieberman has a lifetime ADA rating of 76%.

Senator Clinton earned a 95% ADA rating in 2005, although they have yet to compile a "lifetime" rating for her since she hasn't completed her first term.

Sorry, ADA doesn't rate governors, just senators and representatives as far as I can tell...so no ADA rating for Warner. I rather suspect his ADA rating as a governor would