Are Democrats unrealistically looking for a "White Knight"?

[kentuck]

The sad fact is that most Democrats are more like you and I than like a White Knight. They are no more able to communicate than you or I. They have similar faults and attributes. It is rare to find someone that can inspire and move people with their words and thoughts. People like John Kennedy and Martin Luther King are very rare.

Yet, we wait for that Democrat to stand up and move mountains with his inspiring speeches. But, are there any out there? We may need to lower our expectations? And simply speak the truth as best we know. We need courage more than inspiration at this time, in my opinion. We need leaders with the courage to speak the truth and not worry about the political consequences.

[blm]

1. Even John Kennedy and King had a NETWORK of people to help them.

They also had an actual press that could report the issues important to the American citizen.

[Douglas Carpenter]

2. I agree

I look how the far right working from the aftermath of the Goldwater landslide defeat of 1964 changed the big tent Republicans into a distinctly right wing party; so right wing that poor old Barry wasn't even welcome anymore. But, to do this the right wing did back in general elections candidates and Presidents who were clearly not their ideological soul-mates. Richard Nixon would be a socialist wacko by current Republican Party standards. But, it was the Nixon era that gave real rise to to the longterm agenda of the right-wing.

Since we do not have a system such as exist in much of Europe which is accommodating to third parties and there is realistically no possibility whatsoever that will change anytime prior to the collapse of the current order which I do not anticipate will happen anytime soon--we have no choice in my opinion but to work with what we do have.

Furthermore any survey of actual congressional voting records will demonstrate that with the exception of the likes of Zell Miller almost any Democrat including Lieberman and definitely Clinton are still much more progressive than any "moderate" Republican.

[RufusEarl]

3. Howard Dean this guy is speaking out!

[rman]

4. "we are the people we've been waiting for"

-- June Jordan, poet and activist
http://junejordan.com/

[KoKo]

5. Not a "White Knight" but someone who speaks the truth without spin.

If one compares the performance of Biden, Lieberman, Kerry, Dodd, Levin and other Senators and Reps one sees the "creep" of Congress Creep into their speech where they must abide by some "code." One sees it on the Moderate Repug side to with Hagel and Lugar.

When you compare that to the raving Repugs on the Right like Santorum and the Southern Contingent you hear them constantly on the attack, constantly focusing on the issues they want to push. I think, sadly, more people see the "attack dogs" as real because they speak in sound bytes that don't have to be parsed for meaning.

Jesse Helms and Strom Thurman were masters at going to "the people." Their people. Barney Frank and Charlie Rangel are great examples on the Left of politicians who cut through the crap and spin.

What we saw with Howard Dean was a "rapid fire" list of talking points. If you notice he never answered any of Wolf's questions, he just kept on talking about what he wanted to say...ignoring the tone and accusations of Wolf's grilling. We Dems never get to see enough of Frank and Ragel...so when we hear Dean speaking "our truth" without parse and spin its music to our ears.

We need Dems who can cut through the crap and spin. Who will talk to the "people" and not worry about the abuse they get from the Media when they reach out to the people. It worked for the Repugs...going after their base and ignoring or villifying the Media.

A "White Knight" to me would be one that speaks plainly and distinctly and to "the people and tells the truth as they see it even if it isn't popular."

[AZBlue]

14. Is there one? And how could there ever be one now?

Today's politics is a game of spin. I'm not saying that's right, I'm just stating a fact. I don't think any politician could get anywhere without playing the game. It's not right, but it's the way it is.

[dusmcj]

6. Fuhrer adulation is conservative trait, MUST ditch politics of personality

you've latched onto a very important point - it's a Republican mode to make up for total lack of intellectual capital and platform content by putting forward well-buffed frontmen. If it's got charisma, can wind up the electorate and make them feel good, then hell, let's run it for office.

Well, folks, we would be doing the country a disservice if we were to do anything except work with all our energy to undo this trend. In the collective headscratching over how we didn't landslide one election of 8 years of Democratic excellence in the White House, plus how we didn't landslide a second one running against an ornamental plant and his gardening staff, we have come dangerously close to looking for a "new star" to put up against their "stars". This is what did in Kerry in 2004, that the handlers got a hold of him after the primaries in which it became clear that he would be the candidate, and transformed him from a vibrant lively and smart decorated veteran into a stone-faced cartoon with too much foundation and a voice which delivered a fairly lame message over and over, half an octave too low.

Leave the politics of Fuhrer adulation, "Character" and packaged frontmen to the usual suspects who can't produce anything else, America's conservatives (actually they're the same the world over, but that's irrelevant just now).

The Democratic Party's key failing is that its members have been stupid enough not to understand that conservatives have been making all out war on normalcy for the last 30 years in favor of ideological fanaticism very similar to that of the Taliban. This is not a f*cking tea party folks, the other side is not interested in negotiating, and thinks that giving quarter is for pansies like you. We've been worrying about whether they like us or not and why the people use "liberal" as a cussword (because they've been blasted into numbness by 30 years of clamfucker bombbardment about "family values") and forgetting to in-your-face say "fuck you, you bet we're liberal, and you know what, it's what's best FOR THE PEOPLE, here's the historical record to prove it, so SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU REPUBLICAN SHITBAG". Instead of confirming stereotypes of being a bunch of overprivileged mealymouthed ineffectual fumblers living bicoastal lives and making too much money in the entertainment industry while being detached from the reality of life for the American masses.

There is nothing wrong with the Democratic message as grown into maturity by FDR, it is timeless and absolute, and in accord with the notion of "all men, created equal, are endowed by their Creator with certain Unalienable Rights, among them Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" - freedom from oppression, and access to opportunity untrammeled by social barriers. We've forgotten that it stands by itself, and that the People have been fucked over by a bunch of sloptroughing pigs into believing that the natural state of life is to always have someone licking your ass, and having someone's ass to lick - what passes for "Connected". So let's remember its validity, recall that it's the cure for the latter, and then spread that word in a vigorous egalitarian spirit - "we don't need figureheads, cause our principles speak for themselves, and we invite you to live by them with us".

This is where the rubber meets the road folks - time to prove that the notion that there's no real difference between the parties is wrong, but that rather there is a clear differentiation between what the Democrats offer and what the GOP does. Fail to, and there are a hell of a lot of people who don't care first about the party name, rather they can actually find their principles with both hands and a flashlight and care way more about them than about being members of a club. If the Democratic Party as an institution stops effectively representing those, that demographic will go ELSEWHERE. (Note that ELSEWHERE might be an "expansion" of the two party system to one which represents more than a homogenized moderate mediocrity fronted by a two-piece uniparty. Let's make our choices. Be sure you're ready to stake your future on your assumptions about the size of that demographic. Denial is not a river in Egypt.)

Might work wonders, and spare us the endless cycles of "trow da bumbs out" spawned by Republican promises to champion silent majorities followed by republican sodomization of those silent majorities (and I don't think it's consensual).

Have a nice day (and tell a Republican to go fuck themselves).

[Peace Patriot]

7. Yeah, we used to have a lot of "trash Kerry" threads, and I realized that

the reason people were so emotional about this--so angry--was that they had, indeed, expected Kerry to be a "White Night," to save them. And I think that this "White Knight" syndrome blinded them to the fact that the election was stolen long before the election, and long before Kerry conceded the theft. It was stolen in 2001-2002 with the passage of the "Help America Vote Act"--the $4 billion boondoggle, which permitted Bushite corporations to gain control of our election system, with 'TRADE SECRET', PROPRIETARY programming code in the new election theft machines, with virtually no audit/recount controls. It was lost when the Democrats did not burn down the capitol to get this changed.

And that is a SYSTEMIC failure. It not the fault of one man. It is the fault of the entire Democratic Party leadership, including all the Democratic state/local election officials who fell prey to the bribes, lavish lobbying, "revolving door" employment deals, and sheer, heady, illegitimate power of the electronic voting scene.

By the time Nov. 3, 2004 came around, Kerry was so boxed in--so embedded in a fraudulent election system--with its consequences, in an illegitimate Bush "pod people" Congress, a bought and paid for Supreme Court, collusive corporate media (who DOCTORED their exit polls to "fit" the results of Diebold's and ES&S's secret formulae) and corrupt Democrats tied into the electronic voting industry--that any challenge would have been so serious as to tumble this whole house of cards that our nation state has become. That is, if Kerry could EVEN SEE the fraudulence in which he was embedded. I tend to think he had glimpses of it, and maybe sees more of it now. He was completely powerless to do anything but concede. The system would not have permitted a challenge by him. He might have taken up the role of a Nathan Hale ("I have but one life to give..."), some sort of revolutionary sacrificial lamb, but I don't think he had that in him at all. And it's a measure of how many illusions we still had, in the months following the "election," that anybody expected him to be a revolutionary champion--and bothered to heap bitterness upon him when he was not.

It was our COLLECTIVE failure, as a nation, as a people. Now we have to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, and COLLECTIVELY determine to rid ourselves of these election theft machines. And it is very appropriate, to my mind, that it happen without particular hero champions, but as a true democratic, grass roots movement.

The trouble with "White Knights" like JFK and MLK and RFK is that they can be--and were--killed BECAUSE they represented the people. An entire generation was stripped of its best leaders. It was a devastating blow. It was why we were never able to address the root problem of Vietnam--a war in which upwards of TWO MILLION PEOPLE were slaughtered FOR NOTHING--for war profiteers. The root problem was the war profiteers, who are still with us, and now have us by the throat.

True democracy. Many heroes. No rulers, no kings, no "white knights," no saints. Just us citizens retrieving our right to vote--that the S.O.B.'s took away. Let's get on with it!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

8. where is our Paul Wellstone?

god i loved that man ;(

[Clark2008]

9. Ignored by the media.

eom

[ladjf]

10. What's wrong with searching for an honest, brave, and intelligent

person who cares enough about America to be willing to lead it? Sounds like a good plan to me.

[RufusEarl]

11. Nothing wrong with that!

except I don't see one, do you? I've been looking and hopping that one will show him or herself, but so far nothing. I agree with the earlier poster that said it was up to us the american people to get our country back, I think that's nobel, but I can't figure out how to get it done.

I haven;t been this political since the 60's and LBJ & Nixon, I can see the end of my country and my way of life coming to an end, and I feel helpless. Sell out get somewhere safe, put in a garden load my gun and protect my family. That's all I can figure at this point, because the end is close at hand.

[ladjf]

12. RufusEarl: You and I are at almost the same place politically.

Regarding the search for an honest, intelligent and brave person who cares enough about America and the human race in general: Personally, I've known a hand-full of people who meet that criteria. There are thousands of Americans who could fill that bill. For reasons beyond my understanding, none seem to be in public office.

At this point, I would vote for any person, randomly selected from the phone book in preference to Bush. I admire some qualities in Gore, Dean, Kucinich, Sen. Mitchel (retired), Boxer, Conyers,
Ted Kennedy, Gen. Clark, and Pres. Carter. All are far from being the ideal candidate. But, I'd be thrilled to see any of them in the Presidents office come 2009.

I think our best people are unknown to the public. A political candidate bears some of the characteristics of a "product" and products usually have to be developed in the public eye over a considerable period of time.

What are you suggestions as to how we might discover THE qualified person. I'm joking, buy, maybe we need an American Political Idol show for Democrats, interviewing candidates over a 12 month period by a well selected panel of honest and smart people.

[xkenx]

13. NOT SINCE BOBBY KENNEDY

have I been so inspired by a public figure as I have by Wes Clark.

Wes Clark always speaks and acts for what's best for America, regardless of political implications for him. As a Democrat, with most policy positions as progressive as any, he nevertheless said he could support an anti-flag burning amendment, because he fought for the flag, shed blood for the flag, saw some of his troops buried under the flag. He feels for the symbolism that is the flag, even though some Democrats whose support he will need in the primaries will shy away from "The military guy." But just think of the inoculation he has against the RW attacks in a general election.
The man grew up poor in a single-parent home in Arkansas, was first in his class at West Point, was brilliant enough to write his own ticket to wealth in the private sector after Viet Nam, yet remained in service to his country for another 30 years, building an all-volunteer army,
negotiating the military part of the Dayton Peace Accords, achieving "Head-of State" status re the other NATO countries when he was SACEUR, leading the war in the Balkans without the loss of a single American, and being probably THE preeminent foreign affairs expert in the Dem. Party.
Best examples of standing up to Rethugs are his willingness to go into the fox's lair and go on FAUX News and chew up the likes of O'Lielly and Hanratty. At a campaign rally, in response to a question about how he would respond to Rethug. smears, he replied, perhaps forgtting that he was on CSPAN camera,"I'll beat the shit out of them." When the mainstream media, horrified that Clark used the S word, asked if he meant to say that, the response was "No, I meant to say I'll beat the LIVING shit out of them."
Clark ran large military commands where he was responsible for training, healthcare, education,
and social issues for his personnel, who were, after all, in a volunteer army. If he didn't do right by his troops, they could opt out.
Vision? Just read up on his 100 year plan on www.securingamerica.com which includes a comprehensive energy plan.
Six months before Iraq Clark testified publicly before Congress, urging diplomacy first, war only as a last resort, and no blank check for GWB. Before, and ever since, Clark has stressed that going after terrorists is about getting the real terrorists, getting OBL, not going after Saddam Hussein, the secular ruler who was himself a target of OBL.

[Auntie Bush]

15. Look no further....... We have one just around the corner waiting for

the appropriate time to come out. That "White Knight" is Wesley Clark!

[PWRinNY]

16. My white knight got me started...

...and made me care. I don't think it's wrong to be idealistic and hope for the perfect candidate who will be overhwhelmingly elected and beloved by many and keep Democrats in power for years to come. I think being idealistic is every bit as important as being realistic.

In my case, I was angry about Bush and the direction the country was going. But I wasn't politically involved. Then one day in October 2003, on my way home from work, I was listening to the radio, the news came on, and there was this excerpt from a stump speech, some guy I never heard of campaigning in Iowa, running for president - who was saying everything I'd been saying. I thought it was too good to be true. So I went home, got online, and looked up this guy, and found even more to be impressed by about him.

I got involved. Not just in the online world, but in so many other ways too. For the first time ever, I donated time and money, campaigned in my own state, campaigned in another state. I voted in my first primary. Super Tuesday 2004 - And ran into a former president while I was at it. Now that's a great way to remember your first vote.

Maybe I'll never get to thank John Edwards for what he did for me, for waking me up and making me care more than I ever knew I did, but I'll always be grateful to him. I hope he'll run again. But if not, I'll still have that fire he started in me, and I'll continue to work my heart out for our next Dem POTUS - white knight or not.