Political Animal
Blog
A sorta short week, and compared to last week, a quiet one (unless you are a Republican who thinks the June Jobs Report ended the election). But who knows what future news is embedded in today’s leftovers?
* Great quote from 7th Circuit Court of Appeals judge and legal titan Richard Posner: “I’ve become less conservative since the Republican Party started becoming goofy.”
* Ralph Nader pitches fit over “cowering” Democrats. I’ll listen when you apologize for 2000, Ralph.
* Jordan Weissmann of The Atlantic notes that public sector has shed 169,000 workers just in last year.
* Trump hints scheduling issues might keep him from making big speech in Tampa. Romney can only hope so.
* The Adocate, which has not endorsed a presidential candidate in its 45-year history, endorses Barack Obama.
* At College Guide, Daniel Luzer discusses the difference between educational innovation and technology-based gadgetry.
And in non-political news:
* Happy 77th birthday to the Dalai Lama!
I am pleased to greet a new Weekend Blogger: Ben Jacobs, who’s written for Newsweek/Daily Beast, the Boston Globe, and Salon. Please welcome Ben warmly.
Selah.
Facebook
Twitter
Ron Byers on July 06, 2012 7:20 PM:
A broken clock is right twice a day. What is wrong with what Nader says Ed? The Democrats aren't cowering? Then what the hell are they doing?
rea on July 06, 2012 7:52 PM:
What is wrong with what Nader says?
So, what solution do you and Nader propose, Ron? A martial law declaration followed by drone strikes on the Republican leadership? You guys are always quick to call the adminstration cowardly, but never seem to have a plan, other than steely-eyed determination. Only works in Green Lantern comic books . . .
Doug on July 06, 2012 7:55 PM:
Ron, it's an article from Politico - OF COURSE Democrats are "cowering", otherwise it wouldn't fit the meme.
Are Democrats out charging Republicans with obstruction? Or kowtowing to corporations and ignoring the needs and wishes of their constituents? Some already are and I think the numbers will grow - especially AFTER the convention.
As a bonus, Congress is about to recess for the summer and Congressional Republicans will no longer be available for sound bytes - thankfully. I expect little from the "pretty faces" that pass for television/cable journalists and have not yet been disappointed.
It's one of the things I'd LIKED to be disappointed...
Carl Muecke on July 06, 2012 8:40 PM:
I usually like your comments Ed, but I'm sick to fucking death of everyone blaming Gore's loss to Bush on Nader. Gore lost because he was a terrible candidate, and a big wuss when it came to giving Florida to Bush without a fight.
Nader has been right about everything he's said right along, and the reason Dims lose again and again is because we have candidates like Gore, Kerry and Dukakis who don't know how to get out on the stump, pound out populist themes and fight like hell for the workers and middle-class.
The Dims are losing because they've become GOPER lites, and have abandoned their original position of fighting for the people, and become suck-ups to the corporate elite.
Give it a rest Ed.
mudwall jackson on July 06, 2012 8:58 PM:
"I usually like your comments Ed, but I'm sick to fucking death of everyone blaming Gore's loss to Bush on Nader. Gore lost because he was a terrible candidate, and a big wuss when it came to giving Florida to Bush without a fight."
i don't blame ralph. i blame those who voted for him. yeah gore ran a pretty bad campaign, but those who voted for nader because there was "no difference" between the candidates ought to be ashamed. just a wild guess on my part but there wouldn't have been an iraq war in response to 9/11, assuming that would have happened.
oh and if gore gave up florida "without a fight," what the hell was going on down here for six weeks after the election? after the supreme court coup, what was gore to do? threaten to hold his breath until he turned blue? gore could have continued to fight but the outcome would have been the same.
pj in jesusland on July 06, 2012 10:01 PM:
If Crossroads and a bunch of other conservative super pacs spend a bazillion dollars on their candidate and Obama wins, will that validate the Supreme Court's decision to allow unlimited amounts of money to be spent in political campaigns? Will that prove money does not equal influence and votes?
deejaayss on July 06, 2012 10:43 PM:
Spoken like a true Democrat. Dissing Nader.
I, among many others, would not have been able to vote in 2000 if I had not worn my Nader-belt during a car wreck in 1980.
When you complain about tepid Democratic behavior in support of the powers that be, think of Nader's many successes in bending the corporate will to the needs of the people.
Anonymous on July 06, 2012 11:43 PM:
Number of lives saved by wearing seatbelts
Versus
Number of lives destroyed by a war in Iraq started by someone Ralph Nader said was not one bit different than Al Gore.
Compare and contrast
castanea on July 07, 2012 12:15 AM:
The reason Bush won in 2000 was because the sneering left betrayed American liberals and centrists by refusing to show solidarity against the right wing.
Because Gore was imperfect, the sneering left rejected him, and yet they wash their hands of the results of the Bush years. Wonderful job, fellows.
The reason America has drifted to the right is because Americans have drifted to the right. If Democrats seem tepid, it is because they realize they have a better chance of winning elections by appealing to the lazy center than they do by catering to the temperamental left.
square1 on July 07, 2012 7:51 AM:
The entitlement complex of Centrist Democrats knows no bounds. Rather than dealing with political reality as it exists, Centrist Democrats simply demand a certain political outcome and then throw temper tantrums when life defies their expectations.
Ralph Nader ran for President in 1996. Bill Clinton still won. And if Democrats could hold Nader's numbers to the '96 numbers, winning in '00 should have been a breeze.
But, instead, Clinton hired Dick Morris to undermine the Democratic brand, cut cap-gains taxes, and repealed Glass-Steagal. Oh yeah, and he got his dick sucked by an intern. Whoops!
Anyone who didn't see a liberal defection to the Green Party in '00 coming from a mile away was a political moron. One way for Democrats to have appeased the liberal base would have been to back Bill Bradley instead of Al Gore. Bradley would have cleaned Bush's clock in the general election.
But, no, "solidarity" for Centrists means that liberals get nothing, Centrists never compromise with the liberal base...and any liberals who refuse to dutifully support the Centrist leadership are deemed to have "betrayed" the Party.
Gore still could have won if he had some answer to Nader's charge that the parties were the same. But Gore was too afraid of annoying the NYT editorial staff to incorporate any anti-corporatist policies into his campaign. Gore just doubled-down by choosing Lieberman and hoped that by repeating "people v. powerful" a few times that it would be enough to stave off the hemorraging of liberal voters. (ironically, despite the glaring increase in Nader voters from '96 to '00, there remain many Centrists who argue that Gore lost because he was 'too populist')
I’ll listen when you apologize for 2000, Ralph.
This perfectly encapsulates the paternalistic arrogance of Centrist Democrats. Translation: "liberals, you do what we say and we will listen when we feel like it (read: never)"
JackD on July 07, 2012 9:41 AM:
Anyone who contends that a Gore presidency would have been the same as a Bush presidency is as foolish as Nader.
ColleenC on July 07, 2012 10:06 AM:
Joining the chorus sick of hearing Ralph Nadar blamed for Bush's election! GMAFB! Bush was installed as President by the Supreme Court. Period. HE DID NOT WIN THE ELECTION.
I also agree with the charge of entitlement directed at Ed, who is really showing his DLC stripes on this one! Has he ever considered whether a more muscular left might have helped arrest some of the rightward drift of our politics? To the extent that Nadar won votes from Gore, who ran as Republican-lite, centrists need to learn that the left actually does have enough self-respect not to blindly support a Republican running as a Democrat.
LAC on July 07, 2012 10:40 AM:
Bravo about Nader! That "SHTFP" chant cannot begin soon enough for eyore and the rest of his sit on hands and whine brigade
CharlieM on July 07, 2012 1:42 PM:
You're asking the wrong person Ed. If you think an apology for 2000 is warranted, don't ask for it from Nader. Ask it of the people who voted for him. They're the ones you have a beef with.
SecularAnimist on July 07, 2012 2:52 PM:
Ed Kilgore wrote: "I’ll listen when you apologize for 2000, Ralph."
The Republican Party is counting on sensible liberals to blame the theft of this year's presidential election in Florida by means of fraudulent voter purges on Ralph Nader too. Looks like their faith is well placed.
The fact is that Al Gore LOST the votes of many progressives and liberals to Nader because of his "centrist" DLC / Republican Lite, consultant-programmed, triangulating campaign -- which Gore himself later acknowledged as a terrible mistake.
Those votes were Gore's to lose. And he lost them.
If the Al Gore that I saw electrify audiences and receive extended standing ovations for speeches about the Bush administration's lawless invasion of Iraq and attacks on civil liberties, the Al Gore who won the Nobel Prize for speaking out so powerfully about global warming -- if THAT Al Gore had been the candidate in 2000, then Ralph Nader would probably not even have run.
cwolf on July 07, 2012 2:55 PM:
* Ralph Nader pitches fit over “cowering” Democrats. I’ll listen when you apologize for 2000, Ralph.
Umm,,, Ralph has nothing to apologize for.
Perhaps Al should apologize for not carrying his home state of Tennessee.
cwolf on July 07, 2012 3:08 PM:
* Trump hints scheduling issues might keep him from making big speech in Tampa. Romney can only hope so.
Translation: Trump admits he's not welcome at the R Convention.
DisgustedWithItAll on July 07, 2012 9:18 PM:
"Ralph Nader pitches fit over “cowering” Democrats. I’ll listen when you apologize for 2000, Ralph."
Nader deserves contempt for 2000; as much as you can muster. But that doesn't mean he's wrong now. He isn't. He's correct.
Earl on July 07, 2012 11:05 PM:
Stop blaming Nader for 2000, you sorry-ass Democratic party hacks. Bush stole the election that Gore's pathetic-ass couldn't win. Gore was not due those votes for Nader; no one owed Gore squat. Have some respect for democracy and STFU!