June 26, 2003
Moving On
And so the MoveOn.org primary draws to a close, and liberals the world over await the result.
Or do they?
Though this “virtual primary” received much attention from the media and from the various candidates, it failed to capture the attention of Democratic voters. Why? Look no further than the woeful field of candidates.
It is a sad day indeed, when the most compelling candidate - at least according to the provided biographies - is none other than the Rev. Al Sharpton. He at least seems to realize that before flailing out at the Bush administration, the left needs to address the basic problems of equitable education and voting rights:
I argue that we must first establish the premise in the Constitution that the American people have an affirmative “right to vote,” a “right to a public education of equal high quality,” a “right to health care of equal high quality,” and “equal rights for women.” That would obligate all future candidates to propose legislative policies and programs in fulfillment of the right. In other words, I believe, strategically, my opponents are putting the cart before the horse, while my campaign seeks to put the horse before the cart.
Compare this to the self righteous, hippy pandering free verse of Dennis Kucinich:
We did not authorize assassination squads.
We did not authorize the resurrection of COINTELPRO.
We did not authorize the repeal of the Bill of Rights.
We did not authorize the revocation of the Constitution.
We did not authorize the eye of Big Brother to peer from cameras throughout our cities.
I don't claim to be a Sharpton supporter, nor would I wish to suggest that I disagree to any great degree with Kucinich. Indeed, faced with a choice between mediocrities, one is better off walking away from it all.
And unless a candidate is able to distinguish himself (I'd suggest herself but something in me just can't take Braun seriously) from the field, that's just what a great many voters will do. Term number two for George.
Move on, indeed.
Posted by dce at June 26, 2003 05:11 PMI just get the impression that its too early for anyone to make any decisions, the primary isn’t for nearly a year, and so much it contingent on what the President does: Does the economy rebound? Do we find WMDs in Iraq? What other Arab countries do we invade? Is there another attack? What happens with perscription drugs? What do the September 11th investigation committes turn-up (are they allowed to turn anything up, is anything released if they do turn anything up, etc)? Is there peace in the Middle East?
There are so many Democratic issues (hell, all of them) that depend, they have no issues to their own, if the economy rebounds they can’t use that; if there are WMDs in Iraq, there goes that; if prescription drugs pass, they don’t have that; et al.
They don’t have issues anymore, just counters to issues brought to us by the President.
Posted by: Ry Rivard at June 26, 2003 11:54 PMEven if all those issues you mention fall Bush’s way,they are still valid for the Democrats becasue they differ on them with Bush and the Republicans (at least of political reasons).
The so called WMD issues (WMD’s nuclear, Iraq, preemptive war,etc), even if they are discovered is one of not being honest with the US public. Democrats differ with Bush on the deails of a prescription drug plan and in whose corporate pockets in which they reside.
Just as you say in your response, the Democrats positions are counter to Bush’s. That’s what politics and choosing who you believe is about. There are still distinct differences even if Bush s vindicated and some of the Dems claims don’t pan out.
Posted by: Rick at June 27, 2003 06:32 AMDCE,
You have made an egregious error by taking your own bias and projecting it upon the masses of Democrats. I appreciate your feelings, but don;t try to paint the MoveOn,org experiment has a failure because you are unhappy with the field. Some of us are very happy to have Dr. Dean running.
That aside, here are some points to consider.
People generally don’t support primaries.
MoveOn.org is far from a household word. We in the blog-o-rama land know about it, and some other active folks know, but it is far from mainstream.
Why would you expect mainstream (or better than mainstrem) results from what is a clearly a niche operation?
If you are unhappy with the field of candidates and wish to knock the selection with facts that show it is the cause of low turnout, I’d be interested to read it. Your article is bereft of any facts.
As written, your “report” is one person’s opinion hidden under a headline that suggests an analysis of the masses.
Robbie D.
Posted by: Robbie D at June 27, 2003 10:32 AMDCE, if that really represents your perspective on the Democratic field, may I suggest that you withdraw from your post as a fellow editor of the Democratic Party portion of this blog and focus your attention in those areas where your views might actually represent someone of the party in question?
We will see enough of this kind of garbage candidate-bashing from the GOP and some of the third parties. My impression of what Cam is trying to accomplish here is to have real Democrats editing this portion of the blog. To the extent that this post represents your true beliefs, I submit that you don’t qualify.
We’ve been scammed.
DCE is a conservative Republican who was been writing for the right-column GOP blog… all are hateful anti-left posts.
What gives? WatchBlog just lost a notch in my book. Too bad.
Robbie D.
Posted by: Robbie D at June 27, 2003 04:13 PMI really have to wonder too what dce’s motivation is here. Forget the pamphlet-lenght post - which is a painful length no matter what the content. Even forget (though I’m not sure that I can) that the post was published without any disclaimer to readers by dce that he writes for the GOP blog regularly.
What I can’t forget is that there hasn’t been a post to the GOP blog in FOUR days. Is there really NOTHING for Republicans to be talking about? Or are they sure that the “woeful field of candidates” will fail to unite and find a message the public will rally behind? Such arrogance, historically, has not been tolerated.
And, I feel bad for any faithful reader that has lost faith in this blog because of this. I do not believe this was the intention of its founder. ‘Cause if it is, readers and bloggers alike will stop coming. And this is too great an opportunity to let this kind of thing get in the way.
Now do you want to know how I really feel?
Posted by: 9thwave at June 27, 2003 07:07 PMI am a bit astonished that Cam has allowed DCE to be an editor on the Demo blog at all. Was Cam scammed? Did DCE find a back door to edit here? I don’t know. What I do know is that my faith in the process here went down dramatically after reading that nefarious post in the Democratic blog and it continues to plummet every hour that Cam doesn’t just remove it and acknowledge the mistake.
I’m going to cool off posting new stuff here until I see how this resolves.
Posted by: Dan Shafer (insiter) at June 28, 2003 11:46 AMYou mention the non-candidates like Sharpton, and the voice of the far-left protest vote, Kucinich. That doesn’t seem like much of a substantive critique of the field. How about the front-runners? Why doesn’t Howard Dean even rate a mention? Kerry? Gephardt?
Posted by: Dan Wylie-Sears at June 28, 2003 03:24 PMI just reviewed DCE’s email exchange with me regarding his editor account. The above post is in direct contrast to what he claims in his email:
I thought I’d volunteer to contribute to the Democratic aisle, but noticed that the editor count is already a bit lopsided. I imagine you’ll want to balance that out a bit.To be honest, I’d find it more interesting to
contribute posts on the Republican side. I believe I’d be able to curb my natural bias and post objectively. Might make for an interesting experiment - especially if a Republican were willing to do the same for the Democratic side.
His posts in the red column have been nothing but flame-bait and I agree that his posting priveleges be revoked - at least for now. He will continue to be allowed to post in the blue column since much of his posting seems to reflect that point of view.
