A lot of ink is spent discussing the GOP divide between moderates and conservatives, as an Eagle news article did Friday. The growing divide within the Democratic Party between liberals and centrists is also noteworthy but gets much less attention. The war in Iraq exposed some of this division, with many in the liberal base wanting aggressive opposition to President Bush and a withdrawal from Iraq, while centrists such as Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., and others cautioned against appearing weak on defense and security. The Samuel Alito confirmation is another sharp divide. Liberal groups are thrilled with the calls of Sens. John Kerry and Ted Kennedy for a filibuster, The Washington Post reported. But centrists see that as a quixotic fight that will make Democrats appear as obstructionists.
It’s a similar debate within both parties. Moderates argue that to win big elections and to govern, you need to move to the middle. But the liberal and conservative bases respond: What’s the point of getting elected if you have to water down your principles?
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- Politico on Moore has had enough of House
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/24
- SolDevVB on Open thread 11/24
- Phantom on Open thread 11/24
76 Comments
The conventional wisdom is that both parties have to appeal to the middle if they want to win.
The Republicans have put the lie to this over and over again by running extreme radicals like W. and his gang: DeLay, Trent Lott, Bill Frist, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al.
Americans want to vote for people who stand up for what they believe in.
What’s killing the Democratic party is a simple lack of guts.
High Five, ProudLib.
The problem with the d party, especially in kansas, is that d’s are afraid (and ashamed?) to be real democrats. The d leaders are so damn invested in being republican lite that they can’t even tell you what real d’s stand for. If Jan Pauls is a democrat, I am a right wing zealot. Not.
Whatever happened to giving people a real choice instead of giving them r and r lite? And dont say that is what the voters of ks demand. How the hell would anyone know that, since d’s dont ever seem to present a real choice to the voters?
Tom Sawyer said it best when he commented at Washington Days two years ago that “given the choice between a real republican and a fake republican, the voters will choose the real republican every time.” I say it is time for real democrats to be heard in kansas. The problem is, you arent going to get that hearing inside the party. You have to leave the party to be heard.
Leadership is not doing the same things over harder and faster when they dont work. Real leadership would provide different and workable ideas. But that will never happen here as long as both parties seem to believe that winning is way more important than leading.
The good Doctor will have to agree that Dems have done a terrible job of making case for their programs. Dems seem to be stuck on good policy and not so much on good politics.
Take the moral issues for example. The Repubs have taken the lead on morality by focusing on the diversity of behavior and beliefs (sex, music, evolution, gaming) and have drawn a line in the sand that says you are with us or against us.
Dems also believe in moral issues as well. The obscene disparity in incomes is a moral issue. The lack of adequate health care is a moral issue. The systematic exploitation of migrant workers is a moral issue. The poverty among racial minorities is a moral issue.
I could go on and on but I think you get the point. Dems need a good old dose of Kansas radicalism such as we had with the Populist in the late 1800’s and early 1900’s. Those folks were passionate about their beliefs and were not afraid to making waves and calling attention to the fact politics is class warfare.
The Democratic Party lost its guts after the crushing defeat of 1980, and hasn’t recovered since. Ralph Nader (the Man Responsible For All Their Problems™) condemned their “shameful abidication” in 1986, but the Democratic Leadership Council was too busy attacking those who weren’t conservative enough.
The problem with the label game is that reduces issues to electoral strategy. It’s a cynical frame of mind that says “Never mind what’s right, or what works. Tell people what they want to hear. Appeal to their prejudices and their fears. Bamboozle them with nonsense. Then you can keep stealing as much as you want.” That without question is an accurate description of Reagan and Bush II presidencies.
Clinton played the center, not just the mushy DLC line, but also the constant battle between the DLC and the Democratic rank-and-file, throwing a bone here and there. There were some things about the man to admire, but much more to despise. He came from the “liberal wing” of a conservative organization, so I can see why it turned out that way.
The DLC wants to woo back those who will never support the Democratic Party again without changing their own views. They don’t understand that the FDR coalition died in 1964, and it took the political genius of Lyndon Johnson, who managed to lose a big chunk of the South, to still win elections. Civil rights, contrary to conventional wisdom, did not turn out to kill the Democratic Party. Notwithstanding Nixon, for many years hence, it was a winner.
However, the racists who jumped ship have been plotting revenge ever since and, with help from the religious right, the agin’ers and the justplaingreedy, they’ve had it over the past 25 years.
In Kansas, anybody who runs as a Democrat, especially a Liberal Democrat, is asking to lose. Sure, a few slip through the cracks and win, but it’s usually a fluke, or they run against a really corrupt opponent. Folks, I hate to throw a bucket of cold reality on your discussion, but a Democratic candidate has to put winning over ideoligy. If you don’t WIN, you don’t get to play. If you’re not a player, your policies don’t get put into operation. Face it. Republicans have managed to make “Democrat” a dirty word in Kansas. You’ve let the Republicans define you and the definition isn’t good. Read one of Joe Williams’ posts where he has a shivering fit at the mention of Leftist Liberal to see what I mean.
“The conventional wisdom is that both parties have to appeal to the middle if they want to win.”Don’t think you have to carry the middle?If that’s the attitude of Kansas Democrats, plan on spending forever in the wilderness.
Anonymous said: “Don’t think you have to carry the middle?”
We have to win the majority, not necessarily the middle. You are assuming that middle = majority. I dont know if that is true. Judging from how polarized the nation is, I think the middle might be a tiny piece of real estate.
In Kansas, the middle is where the r’s say it is, and the dems dont even question that assumption. Hell, even joe williams was jumping up and down in a previous post to show how “moderate” he was. If “the middle” is indeed that narrow strip of land between Phil Kline and Jim Barnett and Susan wiggle wagle, then I guess all dems are doomed no matter what they call themselves. They cant shoehorn themselves into that tiny middle.
I think that threat of “we wont win if we are not r lite” is just a democrat fear card…the opposite side of the card we always accuse the conservatives of using. If we dont roll over and play dead, the big bad r’s will win? That is for sure a fear card.
I am not afraid of being a real democrat. The r’s only hold 4 offices in our county, including 2 of 3 county commissioners and it is 3:1 registered r. Dont tell me dems cant win with a clear message. You outta try it sometime.
I do understand about winning in order to play, but if you cant win as a common sense d without alienating that mythical middle, we are gonna be in the wilderness anyway.
And we are there now, even with governor leadership in office. Take a look at the house and senate and other state-wide offices and tell me again how that centrist dem strategy is working.
The joes of the world wont vote “d” with or without the liberal label. And as someone said here before, what price heaven if paradise is lost? If we have to sell our souls to win, why not just fold up and we can all register as r’s. If we have to be r’s to win, then just call a spade a bloody shovel.
Sorry, but I dont believe the dems cant come up with a winning message that doesnt just repeat what the r’s say in a softer and more timid voice. That seems to be what we are doing now. How’s that working for us?
oops, sorry. The democrats here have 2 of the 3 county commissioner seats. Sorry.
Sorry for another PS and for bringing up the hate amendment, but you know us pinkos found some allies on the hard right in trying to defeat that. The hard right also think government has no business overstepping its bounds. Some of us far left and far right have more in common than those clinging to the middle ground.
Ksfarngrrl, I still maintain that all the good intentions and ideas in the world don’t do any good if you don’t WIN. Sure, the country is polarized, but there’s always a spectrum and no matter what, there’s always a lot of voters somewhere near center. We can’t all be radical left or right, thank God! The radical end of BOTH parties garner suspicion with average people. I don’t care for a fanatical Lib anymore than a radical right-winger.”You are assuming that middle = majority.”And you’re making an assumption without basis. I never said that. What I’m saying is, Democrats won’t win without appealing to the center. If you can’t compromise, we’re better off without you. The country is made up of a wide range of people who bridge the entire political spectrum. If the left can’t produce candidates that can answer to ALL Americans and only intends to persue the agenda of the ideological left, we’d be no better off that we are now. Everybody, whether left or right, deserves to be represented.You point out the success of Democrats in your area of the state. I would ask what difference that makes, since by your own admission, Western Kansas is pretty much dead meat. I’m not trying to start an argument, but the domination of rural areas of the state is pretty much over, as you’ve indicated several times.”The democrats here have 2 of the 3 county commissioner seats.”Isn’t that kind of like “ruling in Hell?” No real power or influence in a Republican dominated state.
You can win the middle and still not have a majority, anonymous.
You keep painting the middle as huge, and you dont know that. You dont even know what constitutes the middle or what it takes to appeal to them. Otherwise you would be doing it statewide, correct? Or is the middle defined as just being “not” the left agenda?
Do you think I get dems elected here by pushing the “left” agenda, whatever the hell that is? Western Kansans are so noted for endorsing that far left agenda. I still contend you need a majority whether the middle was included or not. I didnt think the logic was that difficult.
You noted that “What I’m saying is, Democrats won’t win without appealing to the center.” Are you saying you cant appeal to the center without being r lite? Only the message of the r’s appeals to the center? Did you study poli sci at Ft. Hays?
You arent going to get any arguement about western ks being dead meat. I agree. But we are the reddest of the red counties. You would think just having a “d” behind your name out here would be the kiss of death, no?
Democrats win out here, (lol and yes, it is a lot like ruling in hell) when they have a clear message that resonates with the majority of voters. You mean dems cant do that in more urban areas? Why? Because you cant get the message out or because you dont have a clear message? Or because as a percentage, you have more republicans?
Good grief. If we can elect democrats out here where we are outregistered 3:1, what is your excuse elsewhere? Even if there are only 100 voters, (there are actually over 3000) we still won the majority.
Cant you do that too without being republican lite?
PS–If all the democrats in the other red counties did what we did, dems would rule the state now wouldnt they? I see how you are better off without us. Wouldnt want to learn anything from anyone else since what you all are doing is working so well.
If you are gonnna quote proudlib, do it right. He did say: “The conventional wisdom is that both parties have to appeal to the “middle if they want to win.”
His next sentence was:
The Republicans have put the lie to this over and over again by running extreme radicals like W. and his gang: DeLay, Trent Lott, Bill Frist, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al.”
I guess if you just appeal to the center like those guys do, you can win. I mean, arent DeLay, Lott, etc. all winning because they are centrists?
“Ksfarngrrl, I still maintain that all the good intentions and ideas in the world don’t do any good if you don’t WIN.”
Are you winning doing what you are doing now anonymous?
“You keep painting the middle as huge, and you dont know that.”Farmgrrl, I never did anything of the sort. Re-read my posts. Look for what I said, not what you wish I’d said. Fact is, Republicans outnumber Democrats. Without help from SOMEWHERE, Democrats loose on the numbers.”Otherwise you would be doing it statewide, correct? Or is the middle defined as just being “not” the left agenda?”No, the middle is defined in my opinion as somewhere between the far right and the far left, ie, the middle.”Do you think I get dems elected here by pushing the “left” agenda, whatever the hell that is?” Farmgrrl, how Do you get Dems elected? Doesn’t this statement kind of negate your position and support mine? My position in the first place is that you can’t get Democrats elected in Kansas on an extreme Liberal platform, extreme being defined as anything very far left of center to most Kansans. Again, my humble opinion.”Are you saying you cant appeal to the center without being r lite?”Have you found anywhere that I said that? What I’m saying is that you surely won’t appeal to the center as Dem heavy. Radical Liberalism just doesn’t sell in Kansas. Sorry.”Did you study poli sci at Ft. Hays?” No. Poli-sci and Ft. hays are both kind of a waste of time, what?”Democrats win out here, (lol and yes, it is a lot like ruling in hell) when they have a clear message that resonates with the majority of voters. You mean dems cant do that in more urban areas?”The answer is self-evident. Obviously, Democrats haven’t presented a message that “resonates” with voters. How do we change that? Can we change it? Is there a pressing need to? I’m not sure that Republican lite is such a bad thing when compared to the radical left, or fanatic right for that matter. Lesser of 3 evils?”I see how you are better off without us. Wouldnt want to learn anything from anyone else since what you all are doing is working so well.” Bitter and sarcastic? How does that make your situation any better?”If you are gonnna quote proudlib, do it right”It was not my intention to quote ProudLib. I dissagree with him on a lot of issues.”Are you winning doing what you are doing now anonymous?”I’m not sure that applies. What do you think “winning” would comprise for me? My agenda differs from yours, although not as much as you might think in some cases. If, as you say, the governor is “r lite”, I can live with that. She’s a lot easier to live with than some of the Republicans that have been offered.
Son of a gun. I agree with anonymously. Ain’t life strange?
Kansas is about as red a state as red gets. Any more red, and the Arkansas river would be running blood. There is no way that a liberal democrat philosophy could win anyone an election in the state. A moderate Democrat or Republican will have a chance if they have the charisma to go along with it. Even the Democratic demography in Kansas City isn’t enough to get any libs in. The best Kansas Liberals can hope for is neocons don’t gain a majority, I’m afraid.
Is the current governor not liberal to you?
Yes Walker, strange as it seems, I suspect we’re closer politically that you might think. Do you suppose we could start a party based on pragmatism since Libertarians can’t field an electable candidate either?You’re right.”There is no way that a liberal democrat philosophy could win”Democrats would do well to try for what’s achievable and forget the far-left ideology, at least in Kansas. The current governor is what’s achievable, a Howard Dean will never make it here.
Lots of confusing statements here including mine. I agree, you cant come in here and wave the Massechusetts flag and get elected. I am sorry to have muddied that issue. I just dont think the winning concepts belong exclusively to the r’s.
I do think that in Kansas, we mistake “majority” for moderate. Seriously, what is the MODERATE dem positon on abortion? What is the MODERATE republican position on marriage equality? How do you compromise on those issues? I am curious as to what you think moderate means.
And if you look at some of the posts here (and you know who you are!) there are both real lefties and real righties both claiming the moderate high ground!! That is why I call it the elusive mythical moderate middle. I seriously want to know how you would state a moderate message that appeals to moderates in ks?
I swear that people in Kansas think “moderate” means “anyone who agrees with me”. Any one who doesnt agree must be far left or far right. Reminds me of the joke that anyone who says they will compromise and meet you in the middle usually thinks they are already standing on the dividing line.
It does make me crazy when people use the red nature of the state as an excuse for why dems cant win. We are living proof in this county that isnt true. I think people will vote for good and responsible government if it is offered as a choice.
“Are you winning doing what you are doing now anonymous?” Maybe I didnt say that very well.
My point here is that dems have been running as r lite for some time, and as a party, they still cant get control of the legislature. Over the last 15 years, they have had a hell of a time with statewide races that dont include Kathleen. The fact is that she wins, but no other d has won a statewide race for a long time. That tells me it is not a D win, but instead, it has a great deal to do with her personal characteristics. She is charismatic and inoffensive.
So, with the exception of Sebelius, it doesnt seem to me that this r lite stuff works very well for dems in Kansas. That is why I asked if what you were doing was working. Show me a pattern of winning, not an exception. Do ya think the d’s should consider doing something different?
Bitter and sarcastic? I plead guilty. I was born sarcastic :) and do occasionally cut the inside of my mouth with that sharp tongue.
The bitter part? No, just frustrated that we have examples, and not just in my county, of other ways for the dems to win in Kansas, but the party leadership wont listen. They just do the same things over and over again.
I still ask, how is doing the same thing harder and faster working for Kansas Democrats?
kfg,I, for one, hate the freakin’ red/blue state status. It’s denigrating in itself. I suspect it was perpetrated on us by a mainly left leaning forth estate bunch who wanted to liken Republicans to communism, brought about by the Bush election.
Moderate on abortion? Someone who believes the states should be the ones to control that decision? Or someone who may or may not agree with Roe V Wade, but takes a back seat to the issue? I really don’t know.
Moderate stand on marriage equality? Let things that go on in the home, stay in the home, and if two people want marriage, let them, regardless of gender? That may be too far left for most.
You picked two very polarizing issues. Hard to define moderate in those instances. What’s moderate to some will be far left or right to others. Politics ain’t an easy subject to define.
And I agree with anon: the current governor is probably the best Kansas will do. There are just to many salt of the earth lifetime Republicans there to allow anyone else in.
Anonymous said: “My position in the first place is that you can’t get Democrats elected in Kansas on an extreme Liberal platform, extreme being defined as anything very far left of center to most Kansans.”
Anonymous, I re-read my posts on this thread. Where am I advocating a far left agenda? I just said run as a dem, like on civil rights for all Kansans, like on good elder care, like on job safety and job creation, like on protecting social security, protecting our water supply. Those are traditional dem postions. If you think that is far left, well, without being sarcastic :) I guess I see why we have trouble communicating.
“What I’m saying is that you surely won’t appeal to the center as Dem heavy. Radical Liberalism just doesn’t sell in Kansas.”
So dem heavy means radical liberalism? Exactly what does radical liberalism mean for you? Seriously. Give me an example of the radical liberalism you think I am suggesting candidates use.
Protecting workers is not radical liberalism. Providing children with an excellent education is not liberalism. Balancing budgets without growing the debt is not radical liberalism. Teaching science is not radical liberalism. Good and honest government is not radical liberalism. Leadership is not radical liberalism.
If you are not bored and really want to know, I can tell you how dems get elected here. Just tell me you want to hear about it.
Walker, thanks for making my point. The most divisive issues dont lend themselves to “moderate” positions, and compromise only makes everyone unhappy. I agree, the easy issues are the ones that lend themselves to so called moderate positions.
But races are won and lost on the tough issues, not the easy ones. I just look at the red/blue thing as a simple voting pattern. To me, the most important question is why do they vote that way? What choices were the voters presented?
I just dont agree that the current gov is the best we can do. We could certainly do worse, but I think real leadership on real issues can win. I also think she will win, but only because the r’s wont field a great candidate. I cant believe she is the best we can do for Kansas.
One of the ways we elect dems out here is believing that we can win. If we dont believe that, no one else will either. I also dont accept offers from candidates who settle for good enough. Maybe voters havent voted for greatness here because they just havent seen it yet. Maybe that is why they sometimes choose mediocraty. It is so familiar.
Politicians in both parties avoid tough issues shuch as affirmative action, abortion, gun control and immigration for a good reason. The path to the “middle ground” is the path of least resistance and the path of cowardice!
V.L.R.B!!
Ksfarmgrrl,I would consider myself close to”moderate”. I lean a little left on social issues and to the right on fiscal subjects. My guess is that a moderate Democrat is conflicted on abortion. We all know it’s wrong, but some of us aren’t comfortable interjecting ourselves into what is a very personal decision. I might add that I think it’s very easy to be in favor of a total ban on abortion when it’s not your 13 year-old that’s involved.”What is the MODERATE republican position on marriage equality?”From what I gather and considering the recient vote, I’m not sure there is a moderate Republican position. From what I can gather, the moderate Republican view is, civil unions are acceptable just as long as you don’t call it marriage and you don’t make a big deal about it.But these are just my opinions.”I am curious as to what you think moderate means.”I think it means “open minded” and willing to compromise. I think it means having a healthy dlstrust of the fringe lunatics in both parties. It’s the ability to accept that you don’t get your way all the time because you sometimes have to defer to the wishes of others.In your particular case, I don’t know how you’d compromise. I’ve never been in your shoes. But I am sympathetic to your situation, and I heartilly disagree with an amendment to the Constitution that singles out a specific group for discrimination.Does that demonstrate my credentials as a moderate?”I seriously want to know how you would state a moderate message that appeals to moderates in ks?”I wish I had an answer for that. Unfortunately, I don’t. I don’t speak for all moderates, just myself.”It does make me crazy when people use the red nature of the state as an excuse for why dems cant win.”But that’s the nature of things here in Kansas, isn’t it? Mention “D” and 70% of the population turns into zombies. “Democrats baaaaad! Republicans gooood!A respected friend once told me, “Anybody who carries a lunchbox and votes Republican is an idiot”. How do you get that across to a bunch of zombies?”My point here is that dems have been running as r lite for some time, and as a party, they still cant get control of the legislature.”Maybe, as several contributors to these blogs have said, Democrats are precieved as lacking “Balls”. That’s a cardinal sin in Kansas, you know. I don’t know how you get past that. Might I suggest killing and eating a Republican on Live TV? (LOL)”Do ya think the d’s should consider doing something different?”Undoubtably! IMHO, all the jabbering from the national party hurts Kansas Democrats. I don’t know how you uncouple yourself from that. Mention Dean around here and people start gaging. That doesn’t help the image. But Kansas Democrats lack definition. What exactly is it that Kansas Democrats stand for? Your message isn’t out there.Your question:”how is doing the same thing harder and faster working for Kansas Democrats?”My answer:Obviously it’s not.
Thanks for responding anonymous. BTW, I was not looking for your moderate credentials. I dont think the moderate middle is anything but an illusion, but I sincerely wanted to know how you defined some things.
You said you thought moderate meant: “open minded” and willing to compromise… having a healthy dlstrust of the fringe lunatics in both parties. It’s the ability to accept that you don’t get your way all the time because you sometimes have to defer to the wishes of others.”
Anonymous, my point is that EVERYONE thinks they fall into that category. It seems EVERYONE thinks they are moderate. Everyone on all ends of the spectrum. Moderates are not a uniform species which makes it hard for a campaign message to play to them.
I said:”I seriously want to know how you would state a moderate message that appeals to moderates in ks?”You said: I wish I had an answer for that. Unfortunately, I don’t. I don’t speak for all moderates, just myself.”
That is why you cant craft a “moderate” message and targeting “moderate” voters is a loosing bet. You cant define them, cant reach them, and cant do a message for them.
There are as many opinions about what is moderate as there are moderates. There is no shotgun that will scatter shot wide enough to hit the majority of those who self define as moderate or in the middle of the spectrum.
A far better strategy, IMHO, is to have easily understood messages that are good for Kansas, and that will resonate. Things like good and honest government. Fiscal responsibility with everyone paying a fair share of the state’s expenses. Equal treatment under the law for all Kansans. Protecting our water quality and quantity. Excellence in education.
The R’s dont have a corner on those messages. They appeal to all but the fringe of both parties. If those are called moderate messages, then go for it. A rose by any other name. I think you can make a case that all those are traditional dem values, and if you want to return the state to its core values, vote dem.
Back up the messages with specifics. Look at the record and see which party stands for which values. Dems can own those issues if they grow a spine and quit ceding ground to the r’s by cowering and being ashamed of being dems. They need to lead.
You also said:But that’s the nature of things here in Kansas, isn’t it? Mention “D” and 70% of the population turns into zombies. “Democrats baaaaad! Republicans gooood!”
If that is true, then we might as well all fold our tents. If that is true, how do you explain Kathleen and the success my county dems have had? My point was a “d” is not an automatic death sentence. We must be doing something right here to win consistantly.
I dont have all the answers anonymous, but if we dont do something different, nothing will change, and that is bad for Kansas. I say lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way!!!
One more thing. You said:
IMHO, all the jabbering from the national party hurts Kansas Democrats. I don’t know how you uncouple yourself from that. Mention Dean around here and people start gaging. That doesn’t help the image. But Kansas Democrats lack definition. What exactly is it that Kansas Democrats stand for? Your message isn’t out there.”
That may be the best thing you said all day! :)
If dems dont take the lead in defining themselves and quit letting the r’s define them, they will always be perceived as standing for nothing but that “far left” agenda. Which isnt true at all, but its a charge that will stick in the absence of the truth.
If nature abhors a vacuum, then people also abhor an image vacuum. If you leave the space, they will make something up to fill it, no matter if it is the truth or not. Pick a stand and stick with it!!
Do you know the difference between a stand and a position? In a bacon and egg breakfast, the pig has a stand but the chicken has a position. Dems need stands, not positions.
lol, ok, one more one more thing…
I think you asked a question about how I would compromise on the gay marriage issue. I gotta tell ya, I have been all the way around the cup and back to the handle again as they say in Texas.
I used to be really opposed to “civil unions” as a lesser entity than “gay marriage”. Even though it is largely a matter of semantics, I felt STRONGLY that words matter. I also still believe that separate but equal went out of fashion with brown v board of education. We deserve equality.
I have changed my postion on that. Not about equality, but about the value of civil marriage. I posted previously about civil marriage really being about “stuff” like property, assets, etc. Civil marriage is not about morality, it is about property and benefits and protecting a legal and civil relationship. It has nothing to do with the so called “morality” of marriage. Obviously. :)
Now I have come to think that civil marriage is not unequal. I think it really does cover benefits and property for both straight and gay people. And that is actually more of what I want than a church sanctioned marriage. I want my legal and civil rights, and the churches can keep their moral blessings. As I said before, I see how well they are doing with that! :)
I am very impressed with the level of debate this blog has brought out. I expect nothing else from Kfg, and anonymous, you do surprise me. I do, at times, say things to generate a bit of steam here; it is pretty easy to do with some here. I suppose I shouldn’t, but sometimes I just can’t help myself. Idle hands and all:-)
As for the democratic party in Kansas: I would love to see someone with charisma, and a message of unity and understanding, along with a powerful understanding of what the resources mean in Kansas. That includes farming,manufacturing, business, education AND religion.
So far, I haven’t heard of anybody fitting that discription. But I expect if one does pop up on the radar, that person will have to come from Western Kansas. I don’t see the big city eastern politicians being able to do the things that need to be done.
Lol walker, thanks and back at ya.
I would love to run, but I had a wild and misspent youth. You know what they say about western kansas in the 70’s? If you remember them, you weren’t really there. LOL, I did inhale.
Walker, do you think anyone will ever be elected who isnt from JoCo or Wichita?
kfg,Sure . . . and santa’s visiting me tonight, and tomorrow me and the easter bunny are gonna shoot some pheasants.
There were a 70’s? Damn, I musta missed em. I knew there was something wierd about that green stuff:-)
The 70’s? I KNEW there was something between getting out of Nam and that first divorce! Thanks for reminding me, lol!Seriously Walker and Ksfarmgrrl, I’m here for the discussion (excellent by the way, Grrl). Notice I’m not insulting or name calling. I’m trying to present ideas and listen to same. Posting as “anonymous” doesn’t make one a troll or a troublemaker. I’m well known. I also have a job I’d like to keep and my politics could cause a problem there. Remember where we are.
Anonymous, in case you missed some previous posts, I know where we are. I got fired for taking a day of vacation and acting on my politics.
I also apologize to you if I called you names. Sometimes when I think I am being funny I am being a hurtful smart ass. I got really thick skinned over the last 2 years, (see above firing and public hanging) and I forget that some people still have feelings!
I enjoyed this discussion. You both rock.
Ksfarmgrrl, I’ve read em all (great read). Back at ya, grrl!
Nice going, KSFgrl. Great to have somebody doing some heavy lifting around here.
Anonymous’s premise is that you’ve got this silent majority out there who are reasonable people with reasonable, moderate views, so they’ll be attracted to a reasonable, moderate candidate.
I used to believe that too. I don’t anymore.
Reagan was not reasonable and moderate. George H. W. Bush was. He lost, remember?
George W. Bush has been anything but reasonable and moderate. He has not changed a single position of importance–he still believes in tax cuts for the rich, he believes in “privatizing” everything he can (look at the Army), he believes in funnelling federal funds to big campaign backers like right-wing Christians who make out like the bandits they are with “faith based” funding, he believes in cutting regulations on big polluters etc. etc.
He hasn’t compromised one whit on anything of importance to him or his “base”: fundamentalist Christians, social reactionaries, and rich free-marketers (Enron, Halliburton etc).
The muddy-headed middle don’t know what they believe until some politician with the courage of his or her convictions tell them what to think.
The reason Dean is so derided in Kansas is that he is the most feared by the right.
Yeah – the right really fears Howard Dean. Are you kidding? He’s their best recruiter.
If the democrats want to continue to embarrassingly lose elections to imbeciles they should easily defeat, they should keep Dean and Kerry right out there on point. It’s proven to work.
Dean has so far raised more money than any other chairman. The 2005 elections, the only one since Dean’s been chairman, was a resounding success for Democrats.
Kerry lost, but more Americans voted for Kerry than for any other presidential candidate in history (except for Bush).
You can throw your little hissy-fits about Dean, but the momentum is definitely with the opposition party these days.
Even a majority of KANSANS disapprove of Bush . . .
Uh-huh. Let me know when the democrats actually gain serious ground in an election. Until then, it’s all just talk.
I predict that someday even Kansas will have a Democratic governor.
Congrats on the great accomplishment. Has Kansas’ image improved under her watch?
Proudlib, way to jump feet first into a discussion that’s over!”Anonymous’s premise is that you’ve got this silent majority out there who are reasonable people with reasonable, moderate views, so they’ll be attracted to a reasonable, moderate candidate.”Proud, you made that up. Show me where I said that. I’ll be waiting.”Nice going, KSFgrl. Great to have somebody doing some heavy lifting around here.”(Oh, brother, would you get a load of this ego from the “heavy lifter”)”The muddy-headed middle don’t know what they believe until some politician with the courage of his or her convictions tell them what to think.”It’s so comforting to know the political commissar from far-right la-la land is here to guide our footsteps onto the path of rightousness.Rage, XXX, Steven E, Jed, JR, CF, Mr C, Ben, Damoon, K, Sum1, and all you other Libs can go home now. Mr heavy lifter is here to carry the load for you.
“Rage, XXX, Steven E, Jed, JR, CF, Mr C, Ben, Damoon, K, Sum1, and all you other Libs can go home now. Mr heavy lifter is here to carry the load for you.”
Actually, anonymous, I don’t have much time to post this days, and I’m glad to see PL, farmgrrl and others taking up the slack. . . :)
But I would still miss the righties, actually, as well as “mixed-bags” like Walker. :)
Rage,Ahhh, finally recognized for being what I am: a mixed bag. To me, that means I am not in lock-step with any faction, right or left, but think things out on my own. I accept your compliment graciously.
And I agree with both anonymous and ksfarmgrrlon this blog. I would like to see someone who is willing to thwart the right-wing agenda prevelant in Kansas and bring some sanity back to the state.
Even though I don’t live there anymore, I think it has some of the friendliest and finest people I have ever met living there. I wish them nothing but the best, and the current best doesn’t quite measure up.
Rage, I think you missed my point. I guess I never understood the “herd” mentality. I’m my own man, and I don’t take marching orders from PL. I’ll leave that to the Lib Glee Club.
ksfarmgrrl said:”I just said run as a dem, like on civil rights for all Kansans, like on good elder care, like on job safety and job creation, like on protecting social security, protecting our water supply.”
If you add in a good quality public education to the above, you’re talking about good ole’ Kansas values. Something that Democrats can win on.
ksfg,Ellis County, at one time, was a Democratic stronghold. That changed at about the time of Reagan’s first win. My point being that those Vulga (or is it, “Vulgar”) Germans out there have had a history of voting in a way other than Republican going back generations to the Civil War. I wonder if that makes it easier to atract them to the Democratic way. If that theory is correct, Sedgwick County has the potential to come back to the Democratic way, too.
I thought the above listing of was libs was interesting. I can see definite differences amongst this supposedly homogenous group of people.
I have enjoyed reading this thread after the fact. There was a popular article in the Washington Post discussing this same topic.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/27/AR2006012701505.html
Anonymous–
Contrary to the vibes I’m getting from you, I don’t post to steam you off and I don’t think of myself as some towering intellect and everybody else is just an idiot.
I learn a lot from the people who post here. Even Nathan gives me insight of the positions of the radical religious/military fundamentalists and how they can hold utterly contradictory values without “cognitive dissonance.”
I think your view that politicians have to appeal to the general concensus (sp?) by compromising is a very widely held one. I thought that’s what you were saying when you said this:
“The conventional wisdom is that both parties have to appeal to the middle if they want to win.”Don’t think you have to carry the middle?
I tried to honestly look at the reasoning that undergirds that conclusion. I wasn’t trying to distort your position–I was trying to tease it out and figure out what it is based on.
What Reagan and Bush II have shown, in my humble opinion, is that national politics can be dominated not by candidates who compromise and appeal to the middle, but by people who take a clearly defined position and argue for it effectively.
That’s what the Democrats have not done. Maybe that’s what you were saying too and I just didn’t see it clearly.
Anyway, D’s need to figure out what they stand for–be it radical or moderate–and get on the same page.
“I belong to no organized political party. I belong to the Democratic party.” Will Rodgers
It occured to me during the night that maybe we are mistaking moderate for “independent”. Maybe that is how lots of moderates identify, even if they are registered with one party or another.
If you scratch most people, they chose their political party based on what mom and dad were. You know there is a joke in our community about comming out to our parents. The punch line is “they were way more upset that I was a democrat than they were that I was gay”.
Maybe the general public thinks d really does mean far left and maybe they think r really does mean far right. Anyone who is moderate could easily see themselves as simply “independent” of each party’s dominent ideology. Meaning they dont drink the koolaide but reserve the right to differ with their party on certain issues.
Perhaps those are the people the dems should target, and they would do well to let them vote in the primary. If the r’s dont court the independents and they drive them out of their primary, the dems should welcome those independents.
“I would like to see someone who is willing to thwart the right-wing agenda prevelant in Kansas and bring some sanity back to the state.”
We need an avatar Walker. It will be a suicide mission, but someone needs to tell the truth in Kansas. It is a suicide mission because as comedian Thea Vidal used to say “people caint handle but so much truth”. But what else to do? We all see how the “truthiness” is working in place of the truth.Ya know, I used to give speeches saying “choose life” for your community. Not about abortion because I believe in the right to choose. I said make decisions for your community based on what has to happen in the real world just to make the damn state live! Instead, we just mark time and call it progress if we only decline at a slower rate.
I swear, Kansas as a state has internalized “kansasphobia”. We have the lowest self esteem as a state that I have ever seen. Maybe the other plains states are kickin’ our asses because they believe in themselves and we dont. I think that is a function of leadership. That kind of state self confidence is hard to come by with gloom and doom or sunny denial as the choices the two parties give us in leaders.
I think we need the reincarnation of one of the Lewis and Clark scouts to lead us in Kansas. You know the type that looks over the hill, comes back to the people and says “follow me. There is nothing to be afraid of out there.”
How empowering would that be? And how unlikely it will happen in Kansas…
I would also argue, while I’m on a roll here such as it is, that how can one be “moderate” in response to the Worst. President. Ever.
How can a person be moderate when our country invaded Iraq based on a trumped-up case by BushCo. because they want to control the oil?
How can one be moderate when we’ve had five years of the rich getting vastly richer BY DESIGN of the tax code? Five years of falling wages (when adjusted for inflation) for the middle class and five years of rising poverty among the poor?
How can a person be moderate when the polluters are invited into the Oval Office to write laws to de-regulate themselves? And then the Vice-President and the President refuse to even tell their boss (WE THE PEOPLE) who they met with and what was discussed?
How can a person be moderate when political opponents are slandered viciously in the worst kind of meanspirited revenge–John Kerry’s “swiftboating” in which all five of his medals earned in combat were despicably attacked, Clinton’s “vandalism of the White House” which never happened, the outing of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame for her husband’s criticism of Bush, the latest “swiftboating” of 37 year vetern of the Marine Corps John Murtha?
How can one be moderate when companies like Enron and Halliburton, aided and abetted by Texas cronies Bush and Cheney, deregulate California’s energy and then defraud it for billions upon billions? It’s share holders lose everything while the crooks that ripped them off bail out with tens or hundreds of millions? Halliburton’s war profiteering is continuing right now. Moderate?
How can one remain moderate when the United States government detains prisoners, in some cases United States citizens, without trial for years, tortures them, or sends them abroad to be tortured?
This is the most IMMODERATE administration ever. And yet they remain in power.
They remain in power, thanks to the “moderates.”
PL, appoligies. I went off a little too quick. We’ll discuss later (after work) if you like. I guess I tend to be cranky in the morning before I’ve had my gallon of coffee, lol.
“I think we need the reincarnation of one of the Lewis and Clark scouts to lead us in Kansas. You know the type that looks over the hill, comes back to the people and says “follow me. There is nothing to be afraid of out there.”"
Where is that person? Damn, I would campaign for that person 24/7. You are dead on, again: Such a person would be committing political suicide . . . unless they had the chrisma of a JFK.
The problem is, most people with the kind of outlook needed to turn the state around would not be interested in power, or in politics, for the very reason that they would be doing something for people in a positive way anyway. Such a job would have a way better sense of value than politics would.
So far, we have seen nothing but the ususal back-stabbing polyrats and little else. I wish Brownback wasn’t so firmly entrenched in the political bs. Some of things he has championed have really impressed me. But his stance on religion, and his support of Bush, negate the good.
Anon–I don’t have to go to work on Mondays. Woo-hoo!
Steven E, you make some very good points about Ellis county. I have not checked their voter registration lately, but I think they are still majority registered d, even though Dan Johnson snuck in there as an R!
Dan is a sign that the traditional immigrant (VOLGA german, lol) and catholic majority has been watered down. And the catholic vote is changing. Hell, Ellis county even defeated sunday liquor sales. The devil must be ice skating on Big Creek!!
I am sure you have guessed by now that I am in one of the neighboring counties. We too have a largely Volga German population that used to be registered d. However, we are different from Ellis county in that we are mostly lutheran instead of catholic and you know what they say about lutherans. We are just catholics who couldnt follow the rules :)
We do get some residual benefit from our immigrant heritage. They can still cross back over to d without their grandparents rolling over in their graves. I would think you all could play that card too on core values.
In fact, even more strange in 2002, every “no new tax” candidate lost in our county, including an incumbent conservative republican county commissioner. We beat him with a first time d candidate with no name recognition. It was all about communicating the message that we cant cut the budget anymore without killing ourselves.
The r’s ran wild here in the 80’s and 90’s. But in the new millenium, people were looking for real leadership. Effective communication. Truth telling, not truthiness. We told the truth about our county, had three simple solutions for our big three problems. Our candidate won by a landslide. We also ousted an incumbent conservative r in 2004 using the same tactics.
I said I would share my secrets here about getting d’s elected in a bright red county. I am ashamed to tell you how simple it is, but it is effective on state races too. Our county, by percentages, was the third highest vote getter for Sebelius in 2002, with 63% going to her. How hard do you think we had to work to make that happen? (And then she screwed us on water issues….)
What’s the trick?
First, find a good candidate who believes they can win. Candidate recruitment is essential, and most races are won and lost when the primary filing takes place. If you dont have a good candidate, it is hard to turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse.
Promise your candidate recruits support for when the going gets tough. Potential candidates dont want to think their backers will cut and run when the going gets tough. And it will, and it will get personal, so toughen your candidate up by running over “murder boards”. Think Rocky.
Second, take a look at the most pressing issues, and craft simple messages on your positions. Ann Richards (the last REAL gov of texas) used to say if you cant explain it so my 80 year old mama understands it, then you havent explained it very well. KISS. Then take a page from the bush book and stay on message consistantly. Be at every bean feed, rotary club, ladies aids, and whatever. Press the flesh.
Third, treat the campaign like basketball and make sure you have the fundamentals down. As Mary Chapin Carpenter said “the stars might lie but the numbers never do”.
There are these things called voter lists, and there are precinct voting histories and there are these things called city and county maps. Use them. You can implement a targeted voter strategy to effectively use scarce resources.
Ok four points. Here is maybe the most important one. I dont mind my candidates getting outsmarted, but I do mind them getting outworked. We walked the distric till we dropped and I must have said “candidates that dont walk dont win” a thousand times. One of the ways we won was to just outwork the incumbent.
And that work includes the icky job of fundraising. Cars dont run without fuel and campaigns dont run without money. Make your supporters give till it hurts and then use the resources wisely. Be transparent about EVERYTHING!!!!
I know it sounds overly simple, but I think it is a plan that can be followed in urban areas too. Simple is good, and after all, everything I needed to know could be learned in kindergarten!
Sorry for the bloviating rant. I have way too much time to think about all this in the winter…
Walker, you said:
The problem is, most people with the kind of outlook needed to turn the state around would not be interested in power, or in politics, for the very reason that they would be doing something for people in a positive way anyway.
True walker, but a real populist would look at the opportunity to do even more good. What a bully pulpit Cedar Crest could be! Instead it is an insulating fortress.
You also said: You are dead on, again: Such a person would be committing political suicide . . . unless they had the chrisma of a JFK.
Walker, I hate to say this, but Sebelius could be that person. If she would just lead instead of punting and playing it safe, she could do that.
Here is a confession since I dont think too many are reading this. :)When I bash Kathleen, I am just pissed off because she doesnt live up to her potential. She has what we need, but she has political advisors playing it safe and she appears to be afraid to lead.
Will playing it safe win her another term? Probably. Will it benefit the state? No. It will be a waste of a great resource.She has the ability, the credibility, and the backing to do it. I just dont know if she has the will. I cant stand to watch her and her advisors and the party squander this crucial moment in Ks history.
Can you say tipping point? What good is political capital if you dont spend it on anything but higher office?
I failed in my previous rant to talk about the power of possibility. It is tied to the leadership issue. If a leader can create the vision of possibility for people, and show them a way to live into that possibility, they win. EVERY TIME!
I can talk more about possibility and creating a future we can live into, instead of always mis-filing our past in our future. When you do that, you keep living into your past. People dont like that.
What if a leader could show the possibility in a great future, not a warm and fuzzy past? It can be done, and we are desperate for such leadership in ks. Dude, my campaign slogan would be “the future’s so bright, we gotta wear shades” and then provide a simple road map to get there.
I’ll say more about possibility later if anyone is interested. Right now, I gotta get to my mom in the nursing home.
Dang. Good thread. I’ve been taking a breather the last couple weeks. Glad y’all have stepped into the breach.
Back to the phones to push for the Alito filibuster…
ksfarmgrrl,I do agree: Sebelius could have the potential to lead, but because she is not doing it, I wonder if she really has the huevos to do so. The only way we will ever find out, I’m afraid, is if Kansas were to experience some kind of disaster, and I wouldn’t wish that on anybody.
Kid gloves in the political arena is akin to trying to reason with a religious zealot. The one good thing that can be said about Reagan is he was a bare knuckles man who never gave up. You did not want to get in a fight with him. We need somebody willing to do that now, and I don’t know who that person is. Hillary? Pilosi? McCain? All too political; too entrenched in Washington.
Damn, where’s Howard Stern when you need him? (That’s a joke for you without a sense of humor).
ksfarmgrrl,Nursing homes suck. My thoughts at ya.
Thanks Walker. I vote for Kinky Friedman!!! Leadership and laughter…whatta combo!
CF,
Good job on the Alito filibuster.
V.L.R.B!!
Why not? If we can have Ahnold, and the Body, why not Kinky? LOL!
Maybe Sebelius will surprise us in her second term when she doesn’t have to worry about being re-elected. As KFG said, Democrats need good candidates. That’s where we really get hurt. Kansas Democrats don’t groom good candidates, and we don’t get any help (or money) from the national party. Their attitude is, why waste good money in Kansas?Something else worth mentioning. Most of the people who would make really good Democratic candidates have a “past” from the 60s and 70s. This is a killer in Kansas politics. Sure, Connie Morris’ political career survived being a doper, but remember what hipocrites republicans tend to be. As we say, It’s Ok If You’re A Republican.
Ya know, Reagan–a conservative Republican–made a point of appointing the first woman to the Supreme Court. Giving women this kind of power was a position champion by liberals (in fact, mostly just women at first!), and was considered dangerously radical for a very long time.
It’s mainstream now.
Yes, choose your battles wisely, but I utterly reject the notion that the political center is a fixed thing. Or should be.
Im sorry but what does LOL mean anyway!
LOL = Laugh Out Loud
Maureen Dowd has an excellent column in todays KC Star: http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/opinion/13743888.htmIn the spirit this blog has engendered, I will refrain from my usual smarmy remarks and just say that she should get a medal for this. It hits right at the heart of why the Democratic party is so screwed up.
And kudos to ksfarmgrrl, as she said exactly the same thing, as have many others in this blog. Maybe that’s the reason I’ve been an independant for so long: the Republicans suck, and the Democrats have no huevos.
I’ll tell you what, Democrats: Grow some, and you got my vote; don’t grow em, and Judge Judy will get it.
Ian,
We got Biden and Clinton to sign on to the vote against cloture. Considering how risk averse DC Democrats are, I’m pleased. In the words of John Paul Jones, “I have not yet begun to fight.” Just think of the Left netroots as the Christian Right of 25 years ago. Except we’re smarter and not batshit crazy.
ksfarmgrrrl,
He ain’t Kinky: he’s my governor.
J M Walker,
I’m pretty damn proud of the Left wing of the Democratic party. Kennedy roared and Kerry was stompin’. It was a good day to be a Democrat. We done good, though we obviously need to do better. Much, much better.
As for MoDo, please. Al Gore has plenty of fight. Did she even listen to his speech? Considering that MoDo spent the 90’s tearing him down (’earth tones’), she can truly kiss my ass. If there ever was a lady who could have used a good f–, no, sorry, a good DATE, to get over her shrewish tendencies, it’s MoDo.
CF,I denied myself the usual smarmy words because I thought you, and others, might get the message MoDo (MaDo), as you call her, put across so elequently. I see now I should have gone with my instincts.
Gore is an ass whose personality is as bland as white rice, Kennedy is a drunken has been, and Kerry couldn’t carry the distorted message the Democrats were trying to get across the last election.
Maureen pointed out the failings of the Democrats non-issue standings, and all you can do is shoot the messenger. Good one, dude.
Who you got, and what do they bring to the table that can beat the Republicans next time? Be proud of the left wing, at least there will be one of you.
That issue about the sordid, (but really fun) past some of us had is indeed keeping leaders from our generation from running. All those folks I passed a joint to 30 years ago have long memories when it comes to me, and short memories when it comes to them!! Laughing out loud here!!
X–You are so right about candidate recruitment and the dem party. Not only do they not have a farm team (no pun intended) but they eat their own if they try to run without kissing the ass of the party gods!
If you want to run as a dem, and you dont swallow the Kathleen Koolaide, you will be cut off at the knees. She sucks up all the money and all the talent when she runs, and just lets the devil take the hindmost. Real encouraging for would be candidates.
If that is what we have to do to elect a dem gov (starve and beat anyone else) well…what price heaven? No damn wonder she has a buncha nut cases in the legislature to work with. What did she expect when the party cut their candidates loose in favor of the queen?
The day before the filing deadline in ‘04, Tim Peterson, the first dist. dem chair, was still calling the district looking for candidates for the house and senate. Good planning tim. Did ya just then look at the day planner? When I volunteered to run, he said he would actively fight me if I ran as a dem. He suggested I run as an independent, but no way the party would support me. The Koolaide problem ya know?
Is there any surprise that Tim Petereson himself ended up being the only dem running for the Senate 40 district, and the only house candidate he could drum up was a no-name from Leoti?
I guess that is the best you can do with no planning and on short notice. Geez, candidate recruitment and grooming should start the day AFTER an election.
Peterson lost soundly and just blames it on being a dem in the wilderness. Never mind that voters vote dem on local races out here all the time. This being red territory provides great cover for being a looser, eh? Great excuse for not trying very hard.
Mr. No-name was soundly defeated because he brought Eber Phelps from Hays out here to campaign with him. ROFLMAO. Can you say Cedar Bluff? What the hell kinda political strategy is that? I guess he got his campaign advise from Tim.
I see how well the status quo is working for the Dems on a statewide level. Here is another clue for you. Winning in traditional dem territory like Hays is not a great victory. The great are separated from the mearly good by their success in hostile territory.
And CF, about MoDo needing a good “date”? Um…I could fix that….
X–”Maybe Sebelius will surprise us in her second term when she doesn’t have to worry about being re-elected.”
Would that it were so. Does anyone but me think that this cakewalk to her second coronation is anything but a warm up for a senate run or a vp bid in ‘08?
She will ALWAYS be running for something else. And that will also cause her to run away from leading on the tough issues. Why should she, when doing nothing works so well with the Kansas voters?
Sure, Connie Morris’ political career survived being a doper, but remember what hipocrites republicans tend to be. As we say, It’s Ok If You’re A Republican.
X, you know it is ok if you are born again. Now where did I put my holy water?
J M Walker,
And I repeat: MoDo wants some White Knight to ride in and save her–I mean, the country. The political is the personal is the pelvic; her projection onto politicians has everything to do with steering the media narrative, and nothing to do with how people actually govern. Our media seems to be addicted to large-scale misleading narratives, and MoDo’s gift for caricature is part of the problem, rather than something we should listen to as a solution.
ksfarmgrrl,What, and deprive MoDo of the pretext for her martyr complex? Still, if it’ll get her to lighten up on Al Gore, I say have at her. Give her what no man ever could.
Dowd’s column was all whining and no substance. I can see why you liked it, Walker.
By the way, Kennedy is more sharp and perceptive drunk that many people who are sober. . .
The Connie Morris & Susan Wagle trajectory = sexually promiscuous doper – then religious conversion – then conservative republican.
It seems like to me that a voter has all the info they need to know (in the above sequence) that they are not getting a good deal. I am a skeptic when it comes to contention that people change very much when they undergo a religious conversion.
The Amazon book reviewer who called Connie’s autobiography the writing of a narcissistic/borderline personality was so on the money, that I could not contain my laughter when I read the review.
On Maureen Dowd,To think that the New York Times now wants us to pay to read her drivel: I don’t think I gonna fall for that one.
“By the way, Kennedy is more sharp and perceptive drunk that many people who are sober. . .”
I’ll bet Mary Jo Kopechne is rolling over in her grave laughing at that one.
“Dowd’s column was all whining and no substance. I can see why you liked it, Walker.”
Oh, Rage, it had substance, but you left wing libs can’t stand it when someone calls you out with the truth. You would rather shoot the messenger than accept what they have to say, and truly find the cajones to beat the republicans.
MoDo offered nothing? What have you offered but slams? Anything of substance? Any issues that will galvanize Americans? Did the democrats do everything in their power to stop the confirmation of Aliot?
If your replies are at the core of the Liberal philosophy, than I’ll stay on the sidelines and pick and choose who I campaign, and vote for.
Walker, OF COURSE the Dems have been timid and muddled! I mean, DUH! Haven’t I already said that–repeatedly? Tell me something else that hasn’t been true for twenty-some years.
Dowd states the obvious, then tells us they need to work on their “message.” More media-spin talk. I’m completely sick of that shit. No word on what the vaunted “message” should be (some hints, but that’s about it).
Democrats should start speaking the truth. Run it by the media advisor if you must, but quit pulling your punches!
If Kennedy had been convicted of manslaughter, he’d be out by now. But why didn’t the grand jury return an indictment? At any rate, while the people of Massuchusetts keep sending him back, I’m glad that he takes the time to stand up for working people. Consider it 306,000 hours of community service.