Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

January 20, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

CIRCULAR FIRING SQUADS, CALIFORNIA STYLE....Progressives who lament the perpetually fractured and self-destructive behavior of national Democrats always have at least one place to look to cheer themselves up a bit: California Republicans. From today's LA Times:

Republican activists disenchanted with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Thursday that they will try to strip the governor of the party's endorsement unless he fires his new chief of staff, Democrat Susan P. Kennedy.

...."We've gotten to the point where we've just had it with the guy," said Michael Schroeder, an attorney from Corona del Mar and a former chairman of the California Republican Party. "It's become clear that he's no longer pursuing a Republican agenda."

Funny thing, though: it sure is easy to see how destructive this behavior is when other people do it, isn't it? I mean, don't they realize that California is a liberal state and an ideologically pure conservative has exactly zero chance of winning a statewide election? What a bunch of nitwits.

Kevin Drum 12:16 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (83)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments

I mean, don't they realize that California is a liberal state and an ideologically pure conservative has exactly zero chance of winning a statewide election? What a bunch of nitwits.

Yeah, totally. What a bunch of clueless losers.

Hey, check out Armando's new plan for running a slate of left wing progressives in a "50 state campaign" over at DailyKos...

Posted by: The Crowd Goes Wild! on January 20, 2006 at 12:20 PM | PERMALINK

Ooh, ooh, a metaphor!

Posted by: The Dad on January 20, 2006 at 12:24 PM | PERMALINK

this is the mirror image of liberal and union groups trying to slow the Guv's solar rooftops initiative b/c it might make him look good. Wouldn't want to make progress on perhaps the most important issues facing our state and country if it might have a political ramification, would we?

Posted by: chris brandow on January 20, 2006 at 12:27 PM | PERMALINK

I don't see a big movement of leftists trying to oust conservative Dems, I do see a movement among Democrats trying to oust the fairly liberal Joe Lieberman for being a schmuck.

Posted by: Boronx on January 20, 2006 at 12:27 PM | PERMALINK

"Hey, check out Armando's new plan for running a slate of left wing progressives in a "50 state campaign" over at DailyKos..."

Beats the DLC's plan for running a bunch of half-assed right-wing conservatives in an "8 state campaign".

Posted by: scarshapedstar on January 20, 2006 at 12:27 PM | PERMALINK

And, for the record, Lieberman is about as liberal as every other book-burning censor who drones endlessly about morality. Which is to say, not very liberal.

Posted by: scarshapedstar on January 20, 2006 at 12:29 PM | PERMALINK

So. This is off topic, but Kevin doesn't ever put up any open threads so I'll just ask here:

I've grown tired of atrios--he's a bit too facile and crude for me, at least after a couple of years now of constant reading--but I need to keep his slot filled in the blogs I read daily. So, who should I replace him with?
I've already stopped reading Daily Kos. Political Animal and anything by Yglesias are probably my favorite blogs. So, that should give you an idea of my tastes.

Suggestions?

I already read Crooked Timber, the Plank, and Josh Marshall. So any other pragmatic, liberal bloggers with ranging intellectual interests you could recommend?

While we're at it: Any good academic blogs that touch on politics (aside from Juan Cole--not that he's bad or anything--I just find him dull) you could suggest?

Thanks a lot gang!

Posted by: alex on January 20, 2006 at 12:33 PM | PERMALINK

If there's anything that I've learned from reading rdw--and you people seriously need to start tuning into the words of wisdom from rdw, who is perhaps the smartest person who ever posted on a blog thread--it's this:

When Republicans take shots at each other, it's strategy.

When Democrats take shots at each other, it's because of Ted Kennedy and the Kyoto Treaty.

Got that? Good, because I get tired of having to point out how absolutely frickin' brilliant rdw really is.

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 20, 2006 at 12:34 PM | PERMALINK

Alex,
Angrybear is good- mainly economics, but sometimes other topics, from a good center-left POV.

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 12:35 PM | PERMALINK

Arnold won't be reelected if he's perceived as too partisan to the Republicans. So he has tacked to the left with his choice of a Democrat to join his Administration. Clearly his strategy then is to look more moderate. How?

The answer is right here if you keep in mind that arnold is trying to move to the left:

...."We've gotten to the point where we've just had it with the guy," said Michael Schroeder, an attorney from Corona del Mar and a former chairman of the California Republican Party. "It's become clear that he's no longer pursuing a Republican agenda."

Circular firing squad? Hardly. Looks like Arnold is getting exactly what he wants in his effort to remake his image.
_

Posted by: CurtM on January 20, 2006 at 12:35 PM | PERMALINK

alex -

digby!

Posted by: craigie on January 20, 2006 at 12:35 PM | PERMALINK

So... by extension:

"I mean, don't they realize that 'America' is a 'conservative nation' and an ideologically pure 'liberal' has exactly zero chance of winning a 'nationwide' election? What a bunch of nitwits."

I don't think you mean that liberals have zero chance nationally, do you? "Circular firing squad" implies that it's the result of shortsighted tactics, contradicting the conclusion.

Posted by: phobos deimos on January 20, 2006 at 12:35 PM | PERMALINK

alex,

You can't beat the General, although he'd declare that beating him would only be manly and heterosexual in nature.

http://patriotboy.blogspot.com/

The only restriction on his site is that if you're French, you can't post.

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 20, 2006 at 12:36 PM | PERMALINK

Alex,
Atrios may be a bit crude, but his policy positions are not facile, and are actually quite moderate. I recommend continuing with him - the current crop of Republicans are certainly not deserving of much more respect.

For foreign policy, especially ME, I highly recommend American Footprints (praktike plus some others).
The Washington Note, War and Piece, and De Long are all good, but you probably know those if you are keeping up with Kevin and Matt. Stay with Atrios though.

Posted by: theCoach on January 20, 2006 at 12:41 PM | PERMALINK

I love to watch me them California Republicans eating their own.

It will be interesting to see just how dumb we voters turn out to be. Arnie has spent over a year pandering to conservatives, and just had his ass handed to him as a result.

So now he turns into Jerry Brown? Who exactly will buy this? If Dems and "Independents" go back and vote for the Gropenator next time, then you really will not be able to be too insulting about the political intelligence of the voting public.

Posted by: craigie on January 20, 2006 at 12:41 PM | PERMALINK

Boronx,
My problem with Lieberman isn't so much his overall voting record as his eager willingness to carry GOP water. Disagreement within the party is one thing; undercutting your party is another.

Lieberman seems to have heard the old saying about being outside the tent pissing in vs. being inside the tent pissing out and then decided to split the difference and stay inside the tent pissing in.

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 12:43 PM | PERMALINK

The terminator had the right idea. Speak to the right and govern to the center.

That is what Clinton did. He threw raw meat to his radical base in speeches [hillary anyone?] but his administration was friendly to business and the center.

As a recovering goper, I can tell you that Red State regulars know time is running out. Boomers on assistance will start voting left, public employees are what?, 30% of the workforce now?

The future belongs to the party of the people, and that could be the democrats if they rein in their "haters".

I've always said it's the haters on both sides that poison the well of politics. The homophobes and anti abortion crowd are a nuisance to gop regulars.

The Dems just have to put up a centrist, who can raise money from groups other than the Islamophobes who run the party.

[note to Islamophobes on the board - don't insult our intelligence. Kerry was a non starter because this same demographic wanted a non starter against the napoleonic pawn of Israel.]

Posted by: wenn on January 20, 2006 at 12:44 PM | PERMALINK

Kerry was a non starter because this same demographic wanted a non starter against the napoleonic pawn of Israel.

Okay, now that's an insane non-sequitur.

Who or what could rightly be considered a 'Napoleonic' pawn of Israel and why does this strike me as intellectualism run amok? Can you clarify what this term means?

Is there any modern or current application of the term 'Napoleonic' that makes even a slight bit of sense?

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 20, 2006 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK

Alex:

What you may want to try is Brad DeLong's semi-daily journal (Brad is an academic):

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/

Or try these (you will have to Google the URL):

- Shakespeare's Sister
- p.m. carpenter's blog
- Pensito Review
- Nathan Newman
- Mahablog

Of course, my favorite humorous liberal site:

www.bartcop.com

Have a good weekend!

Stephen Kriz

P.S. The California GOP bonehead proves once again how the GOP is only interested in winning, not in good governance.

Posted by: Stephen Kriz on January 20, 2006 at 12:48 PM | PERMALINK

Alex,

If you enjoy Kevin's Political Animal and Josh Marshall's TPM because you like thoughtful and intelligent analysis, you might also try

Steve Benen at www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com
and
Glen Greenwald at glenngreenwald.blogspot.com

I also second Digby, though he adds passion to his thought.

Posted by: The Dad on January 20, 2006 at 12:54 PM | PERMALINK

Is this your indirect way of saying "Lieberman for President"?

Posted by: Ringo on January 20, 2006 at 1:01 PM | PERMALINK

Ringo,
Kevin strikes me as more a Biden kinda guy.

Biden/Lieberman... that's the ticket. All the Joementum you know and love, but now twice the boredom and half the charisma!

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 1:03 PM | PERMALINK

alex, you might try Brad Plumer or Erza Klein.

Posted by: James B. Shearer on January 20, 2006 at 1:05 PM | PERMALINK

yeah, Biden/Lieberman--a balanced ticket, representing the credit card and insurance industries.

Posted by: Ringo on January 20, 2006 at 1:05 PM | PERMALINK

Alex,

Don't read the comments over at Eschaton. Ever. You'll come out ahead -- they remind me of nothing more than a High School lunchroom. Even though that attitude occasionally leaks into Atrios' posts, he's still one of the sharpest knives in the drawer.

Posted by: modus potus on January 20, 2006 at 1:06 PM | PERMALINK

Seems like what the "progressive movement" always does when they don't agree with a candidate 100% of the time, viz Joe Lieberman. If I didn't care about many progressive causes I wouldn't care, but going after Lieberman is a horrible strategy.

Posted by: gq on January 20, 2006 at 1:06 PM | PERMALINK

If you like Kevin Drum, you'll LOVE Andrew Sullivan.

So Kevin, from this metaphor I take it you think this is actually a conservative country the democrats are trying to get elected in? YOu've said otherwise before, that the country is more liberal than the media portrays, but things like this show exactly what I'm always criticising you for - you really have the republican talking points internalized, and any time you aren't concentrating you let them slip back out.

Another call for the Washington Monthly to get a better blogger.

Posted by: Mysticdog on January 20, 2006 at 1:11 PM | PERMALINK

Pale Rider

I am a committed independant, so there is no love lost between me and Mr. Bush. I've always considered him to be a priggish momma's boy,intellectually incurious, and unsuited to power for a variety of reasons.

He outsources book learnin to the help - so that, ya know, he always has the best advice money can buy.

Bush is/was a useful napoleonic type, elevated to power to serve men who convinced him he was another Reagan.

Reagan may have been vacant - but he had fewer delusions of grandeur.

Georgie 2 is but a swaggering moppet - not a lick
of intellectual curiosity - accustomed to being told he's bright when he's not - spoiled by privilege - with an inflated self image, surrounded by churchlady amazons - AND

his greatest crime?

He makes Clitnon look good. I'll never forgive him for that.

And had the little asshole read any Machiavelli - he might not have turned out to be a caricature of the Shakespearean tragedy.

"How painful for a child of privilege accustomed to abusing everybody else to wake up and discover he's been had by people far more aware and intelligent than him."

Posted by: wenn on January 20, 2006 at 1:11 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, gq. That's why the Dems have an anti-choice, anti-gun control, pro-death penalty, pro-Iraq invasion Mormon as their minority leader in the House.

Lieberman would help his cause a lot if he didn't seem to have a contract with the GOP to be their token Dem whenever they need a veneer of bipartisanship.

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINK

The homophobes and anti abortion crowd are a nuisance to gop regulars.

They're kind of a nuisance to gays and women, too.

Posted by: craigie on January 20, 2006 at 1:15 PM | PERMALINK

MJ: Biden/Lieberman... that's the ticket. All the Joementum you know and love, but now twice the boredom and half the charisma!

Ringo: yeah, Biden/Lieberman--a balanced ticket, representing the credit card and insurance industries.

Fantastic, you two.

The Illinois Republican Party imploded a couple of years ago after the governor got indicted (FITZ!) in a statewide scandal involving the selling of commercial drivers' licenses. Since then, the infighting between the religious right (which calls any pro-choice gopper a RINO and argued passionately that Keyes was going to win despite the polls showing Obama ahead by like 50 points) and the more moderate wing of the party has been fierce--and fiercely amusing.

I only hope that you Californians enjoy watching the dogfight as much as we in Illinois have.

Posted by: shortstop on January 20, 2006 at 1:15 PM | PERMALINK

Welcome back, Arsenia. Old name wasn't working well, eh?

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 1:17 PM | PERMALINK

The future belongs to the party of the people, and that could be the democrats if they rein in their "haters".

BTW, this sort of thing drives me nuts. Sure, there are left wingers who rant about everyone to the right of them - sometimes they show up here - but (and here's the important part, so pay attention)
nobody like that has any political power

Whereas the Right is overflowing with people who despise everyone (Christ, it's just a laundry list of the Right) and all these people have power and influence. Even the unelected ones, from Norquist to Robertson to Reed to Dobson, Malkin and Coulter, not to mentiona actual politicians, these people are all hateful rhetoric all the time, and they have influence

There's just no equivalent on the left. None.

Posted by: craigie on January 20, 2006 at 1:19 PM | PERMALINK

mystic dog

I am decidedly right of center and I also believe the country is headed left.

If only because the political class always overplays their hand when herding the grass eaters.

Gopers have convinced us that a police state is necessary to fight Islamophobic bugi men - but the country is poised to listen to those with a diplomatic solution.

Americans don't have the disposition for hegemony. Unless those who brought us 9/11 keep terrorizing us with new false flags.

Still, the time is coming where Americans will ask for an honest discussion [that's one where half the panel holds only one passport].

Europe will engage Muslims because of demographic necessity. Ditto for Asia, Australia and Africa.

America will entertain engagement if we can keep suitcase nukes out of the hands of neocons for Israel.

Got the picture?

1.6 Billion Muslims must be engaged - not slaughtered. Pity the poor Mossad. And after all their years of planning.

Posted by: wenn on January 20, 2006 at 1:21 PM | PERMALINK

"I am decidedly right of center and I also believe the country is headed left."

Wait a second, I thought you were libertarian yesterday?

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 1:23 PM | PERMALINK

fairly liberal Joe Lieberman

Waaaa?

Fairly liberal? Joe "I've never disagreed with anything that Bush has done" Lieberman?

You've got a pretty weird definition of liberal.

Posted by: Dr. Morpheus on January 20, 2006 at 1:24 PM | PERMALINK

craigie -

If you peruse any of these threads, the haters are self evident. Just look at the description of Red State Voters.

The extreme left and the extreme right are problematic to the future of either party.

Posted by: wenn on January 20, 2006 at 1:24 PM | PERMALINK

Speaking of Arsenia, she made some post about "THAT ethnicity" in a thread discussing Israel yesterday. So it never takes very long for that stuff to come out.

Posted by: shortstop on January 20, 2006 at 1:27 PM | PERMALINK

You know, shortstop, it's funny. There is a certain poster who showed up shortly after Arsenia left, who seems to be quote-mining Arsenia from another thread on a different forum. Amazing, eh?

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 1:28 PM | PERMALINK

speaking of haters - they have arrived

to squelch honest discussion

watch the ploy

it's always the same

the subject matter disappears - just like a Free Republic - and the thread dissolves into name calling - until interested readers move on

gosh... I wonder who?

Posted by: wenn on January 20, 2006 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINK

You know, Kevin, this post is even worse than I originally thought. You have the democratic party leadership doing everything it can to marginalize its best grass roots populist leaders.

Are you saying the democratic mainstream party members can't criticize members who consistently vote against the party's values or consistently attack the party and give favor to the republicans?

Or do you think that Lieberman is a great example of what a democrat should be? Or Biden?

If that's the case, I'd love to hear how you think Holy Joe has supported the democratic party, or America, since Bush came into power. Has he offered up or supported legislation to expand opportunity for all Americans? Has he offered protections for citizens against the predatory capitalism espoused by Republicans? Has he stood up to protect the men and women in the armed forces, to prevent their lives from being squandered in Iraq with insufficent numbers and equipments? Has he stood up against the disasterus foreign policy the US has been engaged in for 5 years now?

Seriously, Kevin, Leiberman may have been a democrat once upon a time, but what strength has he offered the party since losing the VP slot? Even his supposed judicial compromise, designed to preserve the ability to fillibuster bad presidential nominees, has turned out to be a hollow victory, as he still won't protect the nation for a really, really bad judge who has and will vote to expand presidential authority far beyond anything envisioned in the constitution.

There doesn't have to be ideologicial purity, but there should be some overlap, shouldn't there? Ideology is not a bad word, it is what is supposed to bind a party into a cohesive and effective force. Or do you need to appear too jaded and cynical to believe that ideology means anything, politics is just a game? Are you hoping for a think tank slot? A CNN commentator position?

What the hell does Kevin Drum believe? Is there anything there beyond a hollow sportsfan-style partisanship?

Posted by: Mysticdog on January 20, 2006 at 1:34 PM | PERMALINK

Out of curiosity, Arsenia, why did you feel compelled to change your name after your views were posted elsewhere? We have plenty of people who disagree quite vehemently on this forum- just ask tbrosz and mcaristotle. Hell, I got on the wrong side of a lot of posters here on the death penalty a while back. But we still use our names. One might think you didn't want to be associated with your views?

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 1:37 PM | PERMALINK

Excuse me, should be "our same names".

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 1:38 PM | PERMALINK

wenn,

None of that made sense.

We all have posts that take a flight of fancy all their own, but you're swimming in the jetstream on the gossamer backs of a pair of magical dodo birds.

I would ask that you never, ever apply the term 'Napoleonic' to anything ever again, not even on your own time, even if you're just whispering to a co-worker about Napoleon Bonaparte and something that he, himself did.

Better yet, this blog has a certified genius who graces us with his benevolent presence. His name is:

rdw

And he crushes everyone like a grape. He's like, totally the smartest person here and if he ever gives you the slightest bit of attention, consider yourself schooled.

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 20, 2006 at 1:42 PM | PERMALINK

Oh, good, now we've moved on to criticizing Kevin's defense of Lieberman as though he actually made one.

Which is not to say I don't think Kevin couldn't be a little more discerning about what helps Republicans and what helps Democrats. But give it a rest, Mysticdog. If you hate everything about this blog, there are plenty of others.

Posted by: shortstop on January 20, 2006 at 1:43 PM | PERMALINK

If you peruse any of these threads, the haters are self evident. Just look at the description of Red State Voters.

You miss my point. I'm not denying extremism - or rudeness. I'm saying that there are no leftwing extremists in America with any power or influence

Unless Karl Rove is in here posting under the name "tbrosz", the noodlings in here have no impact, real or imagined, on actual policy. Whereas the crazed slobbering of a Ralph Reed, say, very much does. That's the point.

Posted by: craigie on January 20, 2006 at 1:45 PM | PERMALINK

This was my favorite Arsenia quote:

Point taken. But I don't go to Mardi Gras because I would be offended by people yelling "show your tits".

Well, thank goodness, grandma. Those things would probably stop the rebuilding efforts and cause the levees to break.

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 20, 2006 at 1:45 PM | PERMALINK

Dammit, P.R., are you trying to summon him or something? Didn't you see Candyman?

Posted by: S Ra on January 20, 2006 at 1:49 PM | PERMALINK

Pale Rider,
Here's another Arsenia quote you might like:

"I am a committed Perotista - so there is no love lost between me and Mr. Bush. I've always
considered him to be a priggish momma's boy,
intellectually incurious, and unsuited to power for a variety of reasons. He outsources book learnin to the help - so that, ya know, he always has the best advice money can buy. As for his family - they routinely drink at the well with the devil - this time they needed a longer straw."
-Posted by: arsenia gallegos at December 2, 2005 11:32 AM
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001129.html

Scroll up to this thread about 1:11. Notice any... uhhh... similarity? I mean, I enjoy a good bigoted troll as much as the next guy, but you'd think they would have the self-esteem to keep the same name and stand by their views.

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 1:56 PM | PERMALINK

Dammit, P.R., are you trying to summon him or something?

Look, S Ra--we just have to accept it. rdw is smarter than all of us put together, plus he knows way more about stuff. I realize that we shouldn't be revealing this openly on a blog thread, but come on--he's beaten us. He's won. I locked myself in my car for three hours this morning, crying and scared, wondering how I'll ever figure out how to post here so that rdw doesn't kick my ass.

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 20, 2006 at 1:57 PM | PERMALINK

I locked myself in my car for three hours this morning, crying and scared, wondering how I'll ever figure out how to post here so that rdw doesn't kick my ass.

ROTFLMAO!

Posted by: trex on January 20, 2006 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINK

MJ,

I mean, I enjoy a good bigoted troll as much as the next guy, but you'd think they would have the self-esteem to keep the same name and stand by their views.

Grandma floppy boobs? Is this the same person? Now if rdw and this bag of nuts get going, forget it. Shut down the thread and run!

They'd tear the place up.

Posted by: Pale Rider on January 20, 2006 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINK
Lieberman would help his cause a lot if he didn't seem to have a contract with the GOP to be their token Dem Posted by: MJ Memphis
Since Zell Miller retired, the GOP needs someone and the campaign donations will be good.
If you peruse any of these threads, the haters are self evident. ... The extreme left and the extreme right are problematic to the future of either party. Posted by: wenn
Consider them persused. Tsk! The best haters all seem to be on the right.

Ann Coulter represents the Democratic mainstream better than Al Gore on this one." Dick Morris.

Nope, the extreme right isn't in the least bit problematic to the Republican Party. It has embraced them.

Posted by: Mike on January 20, 2006 at 2:14 PM | PERMALINK
Fairly liberal? Joe "I've never disagreed with anything that Bush has done" Lieberman?

Lieberman has a reasonably liberal voting record across the broad range of issues, and is therefore, in one sense, "fairly liberal".

He also is the go-to guy in the Democratic Party for reliably criticizing the liberal values, others in the Democratic Party, and cheerfully sucking up to Republicans and their rhetoric.

Lieberman is very odd.

Posted by: cmdicely on January 20, 2006 at 2:17 PM | PERMALINK

Mike, wenn/Arsenia is searching for the perfect anti-Semite, anti-gay, anti-Iraq war party to join up with. Sadly for her and the dozens of people like her, there isn't one around at the moment.

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

"Lieberman is very odd."

I don't know if I would agree with that, cm- I think he represents a pretty common type. Lieberman enjoys the thrill of playing "against type", he's just done it so often that it really isn't against type anymore. He falls into the same niche as the "proud political independents" who, when queried, turn out to have voted straight GOP tickets for the last 20 years- but, by gosh, they aren't partisans!

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINK

I've already stopped reading Daily Kos. Political Animal and anything by Yglesias are probably my favorite blogs. So, that should give you an idea of my tastes.

Suggestions?

Yes.

Although I'm much farther left than he is, for a well-reasoned intellectual smackdown, I always enjoy Winston Smith's 'Philosoraptor.'

http://philosoraptor.blogspot.com

---Myca

Posted by: Myca on January 20, 2006 at 2:24 PM | PERMALINK

You rang?

I think wenn is a breath of fresh air

Posted by: rdw on January 20, 2006 at 2:48 PM | PERMALINK

I'm really puzzled by this whole notion of Republicans characterizing anyone who disagrees with the Bush/Cheney partyline as being a "Bush hater"??? There are several things about it that puzzle me - namely:

(1) How does calling someone a "hater", whether it is true or not, constitute a defense of their guy's positions?
(2) By this same logic then, weren't all of Bill Clinton's critics simply "Clinton haters", thereby invalidating anything bad that was ever said about Clinton?
(3) I know lots of Republicans who think that Bush is the worst president ever and believe that he has been a disaster to the GOP - are they also "haters"? I also know some extremely religious people (e.g. nuns) who think George W. Bush is a disaster and they don't have a molecule of hate in them - how are they "haters"?
(4) Does any criticism of any president any time constitute "hating", thereby invalidating the opposing parties legitimacy? If so, how is America any different than an autocracy?

Help me out with this notion - These are truly bizarre times we live in.....

Posted by: Stephen Kriz on January 20, 2006 at 2:54 PM | PERMALINK

Funny thing: This adm.likes to say they are the party of Lincoln,Found out the other day Lincoln was Gay,Kinda makes one proud.

Posted by: patton on January 20, 2006 at 2:55 PM | PERMALINK

Stephen -

You are applying logic to conservative comments. It doesn't work. Don't bother trying.

Posted by: craigie on January 20, 2006 at 3:35 PM | PERMALINK

a single name proves your point, Kevin.
Bill Simon.

Anybody remember him? The wacky CA GOP nominated Bill Simon, rightwing bizman with zippo pol expereince instead of Richard Riordan, former LA mayor and "moderate" GOPer. That led to a Davis second term, which begot a recall, which produced a midterm gov race with 248 wacky candidates including a porn star, which produced a hollywood tough guy governor, who now, after having his pee pee wacked in an unuaul midterm election, is moving to the left in response to the needs of the people of the great state of CA.

Adice to Ca GOP...baby steps, baby steps. But apparently, they don't listen too well.

Posted by: the fake Fake Al on January 20, 2006 at 4:11 PM | PERMALINK

what! THE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA IS A REPUBLICAN?? DIDN'T YOU DEMOCRATS SAY THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN????

By the way, I hear since the NYT publish their article on NSA wiretaps, Al Queda and related terrorist groups have significantly reduced their electronic communications. WAY TO GO GUYS...IF WE GET HIT AGAIN, IT WILL MOST LIKELY BE BECAUSE THE NYT TOLD THE TERRORISTS TO KEEP QUIET ON UNSECURE LINES AND USE COURIERS, CODES IN E-MAIL ETC.

Posted by: Patton on January 20, 2006 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINK

Gee Patton, are you dense enough to think that our arch enemy AQ doesn't know we are listening all the time, everywhere dispite what the NTYs publishes. Your side really is incompetent.

OBL: (fold his copy of the NYT) well, its not printed in the NYTs this morning therefore they must not be listening or watching. Break out the sat phones and lets talk.

BTW, did you pick up that TP listening to Rush on the way to work this morning?

Nice echo in here.

Posted by: the fake Fake Al on January 20, 2006 at 4:23 PM | PERMALINK

I just found out that I have a reading disability. I can't read text typed in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS!

Posted by: Cal Gal on January 20, 2006 at 4:43 PM | PERMALINK

"Al Queda and related terrorist groups have significantly reduced their electronic communications. WAY TO GO GUYS"

On February 5, 2003, Secretary of State, Colin Powell, under the directions of the President of the United States, George W. Bush, with the full sanctions of the Republican Congress, and vis-a-vis the Republican party, willfully and knowingly revealed our electronic capabilities to the world at the UN in the effort to justify going to war against Iraq.
Not just once, but repeatedly, exposed our capabilities to the world through imagery and eavesdropping.
In short, Pat-ton (far to much respect for the General to ever spell your s/n correctly) unbunch your undies.
It was your vaunted Republican party who betrayed our abilities to the world, and to Osama Bin Laden long before the NYtimes had a clue as to what we were capable of doing.

Posted by: sheerahkahn on January 20, 2006 at 4:51 PM | PERMALINK

One more time,Sen. Orrin Hatch let the cat out of the bag about our listening ability's right after 911 communacation stopped right after that.Oh and Orrin Hatch is a repub.

Posted by: scott on January 20, 2006 at 5:09 PM | PERMALINK

Anybody interested, I've laid a rather severe smackdown on r-eally d-ense w-ingnut in the Values thread.

Pale Rider, you should check it out :)

Bob

Posted by: rmck1 on January 20, 2006 at 5:20 PM | PERMALINK
I don't know if I would agree with that, cm- I think he represents a pretty common type. Lieberman enjoys the thrill of playing "against type", he's just done it so often that it really isn't against type anymore. He falls into the same niche as the "proud political independents" who, when queried, turn out to have voted straight GOP tickets for the last 20 years- but, by gosh, they aren't partisans!

Yeah, the difference is that most of those self-styled "independents" (often even registered Republicans) usually spend all their time bashing Democrats and supporting Republicans. Its just a clear lie that they are independents, designed to give themselves credibility with people that don't examine the issue closely. That's understandable, if dishonest.

Lieberman votes like a Democrat, but bashes the rest of his party, and praises the rhetorical positions of the Republicans quite often. That's the odd thing. He hurts the Democrats politically, all while voting with them. That's the odd thing.

Posted by: cmdicely on January 20, 2006 at 5:21 PM | PERMALINK

cmdicely,
This is true. The only way I can explain it is that Lieberman is, to some degree, a genuine Democrat policy-wise, but he thinks that his playing against type gives him more credibility than if he talked the way he voted.

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 5:29 PM | PERMALINK
wenn/Arsenia is searching for the perfect anti-Semite, anti-gay, anti-Iraq war party to join up with. RE Lieberman: I don't know if I would agree with that, Posted by: MJ Memphis
Let's see, Republicans: Evangelicals: anti-Semitic, pro-Zionists; definitely anti-gay even the gay ones; pro-Iraq war anti-fightin' it. Hmm, you're right: It's gonna be tough for he/she/it. Maybe one day, the Army's enlistment standards will catch up with their qualifications.

I think Lieberman is one of those guys who are so decent they can't imagine anyone being otherwise so they constantly take them at their word. We all know what Bush's word is worth, but as long as he can find an alibi, Joe believes him.

wenn is a breath of fresh air Posted by: rdw

Flatulence, meet methane.

Posted by: Mike on January 20, 2006 at 5:30 PM | PERMALINK

Mike,
Well, I wouldn't worry about the enlistment standards... wenn-senia already stated (in the Google thread above) that the Army is part of the "dregs of public employment".

Posted by: MJ Memphis on January 20, 2006 at 5:36 PM | PERMALINK

Mike,,

Great, now if he would just strike a match.

Posted by: thethirdPaul on January 20, 2006 at 6:32 PM | PERMALINK

I find Arsenia so Rugged, Refined and Real - A true Telluride vixen - Plan to join her the week of February 26 and stay until March 5 and ski our buns off - Am bringing all of my friends from Drexel Hill - Love them Gay Pride Weeks on the slope. - I'll sign them all as Log Cabin Repugs - Maybe Wenn can join us for some hot tubs. Now, if we could just get Michael L Cook to fly in from Seattle with his cowboy hat and belt with MICHAEL on the back, YEE HAH.

Posted by: rdw on January 20, 2006 at 6:44 PM | PERMALINK

funny how kevin rails against democrats for not standing for anything...and then rails against california republicans for sticking with their ideology. I can't stand their ideology, but at least can give the californian republicans credit for sticking with what they beleive in. Dems should be so true to democratic values instead of triangulating all the time. Kevin too should stop trying to have it all ways.

Posted by: gak on January 20, 2006 at 7:22 PM | PERMALINK

By the way, I hear since the NYT publish their article on NSA wiretaps, Al Queda and related terrorist groups have significantly reduced their electronic communications. WAY TO GO GUYS...IF WE GET HIT AGAIN, IT WILL MOST LIKELY BE BECAUSE THE NYT TOLD THE TERRORISTS TO KEEP QUIET ON UNSECURE LINES AND USE COURIERS, CODES IN E-MAIL ETC

Posted by: Patton on January 20, 2006 at 7:53 PM | PERMALINK

"I can't stand their ideology, but at least can give the californian republicans credit for sticking with what they believe in. Dems should be so true to democratic values instead of triangulating all the time."

Governing is about compromise. In California the legislature is dominated by extremely ideological Republicans and Democrats, which makes any sort of meaningful progress difficult because there is little common ground. When there are attempts (every so often) at bi-partisan solutions, the elected officials are reprimanded harshly by powerful party ideologues because, heaven forbid, they work together. This is not useful or productive.

Sure, CA Republicans might try to undermine Arnold, but the CA Democratic activists are doing their own part. Many of them are out supporting Angelides who's out on the stump calling for tax increases. If Angelides wins the primary we can go ahead and congratulate Arnold on another four years.

Posted by: CA Political Guy on January 20, 2006 at 7:57 PM | PERMALINK

So much for the so-called "big tent."

Gee, maybe if they strip Ahnuld of party membership, the Calif. GOP can launch a recall. Wouldn't that be sweet irony?

Or maybe Gov. S. should read up on President Tyler, left in office without a party affiliation when the Whigs booted him out of their party.

Posted by: notmax on January 20, 2006 at 7:59 PM | PERMALINK

Hey, Kevin :

No, no, the crying about Schwarzenegger's "Democratic Agenda" is a ploy. This is the idea. Get the media outlets to write these puff pieces with these kinda quotes, to start convincing everyone that Arnie is becoming "more liberal."

And of course there will be all kinds of reasons offered, and many more puff pieces by "political correspondents" and "news analysts" to hype this up too. Just what Arnold needs now that he is the front good-ole boy for the Corporations. Remember that during the Recall episode Orrin Hatch of Utah speculated publically on the need to "amend the constitution to allow naturalized citizens the chance to run for President."

No doubt there are some agrieved California Republicans, but leave no doubt that this will also be hyped and used as another ploy just like the "recall hoax." After all wasn't it a Southern California Republican Daryl something-or-other who started the recall fire, eh. Arnie moves in during mid-stream.

It's all a charade folks. Don't be fooled agin.

Posted by: Gino on January 20, 2006 at 9:05 PM | PERMALINK

Gino, smart observation and very Rove-like.

Posted by: CA Political Guy on January 20, 2006 at 9:41 PM | PERMALINK

Are you kidding?

This is precisely what they need to say to help him get reelected.

I don't doubt the strong possibility that they're saying it not for calculated reasons but just throwing a tantrum, but that doesn't mean it doesn't help Arnold.

He needs to reestablish his centrist credentials, and being disowned by the GOP in California is about as good as it gets.

Posted by: The Blue Nomad on January 20, 2006 at 10:42 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin,

"Purity" is a strawman word, used by others, to describe the demands of liberal activists, and you've been doing it yourself for a couple of days now. I, for one, am a garden-variety liberal activist, and former Democrat, who did indeed leave the party (and joined the Green Party) because I was disenchanted by the party's consistent rightward creep. But it wasn't purity that I expected from the Democrats. I promise, I could've tolerated the party deviating from liberal values in a handful of policy areas. Indeed, I HAD been tolerating them, for years. I HAD been tolerating "impurity."

But when there became, literally, 12-15 significant policy areas where the so-called "progressive" party in Washington no longer genuinely stood for progressive values, I (personally) could no longer stand with this party. Again, not two or three policy areas. Twelve to fifteen.

I'd love to come back to the Democratic Party. For it to happen, I ask the party not to be pure, but simply to be genuinely progressive, more often than not.

Your "purity" word is a strawman, Kevin.

Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA

Posted by: Patrick Meighan on January 21, 2006 at 12:14 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly