Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The reason I support...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:05 AM
Original message
The reason I support...
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 10:41 AM by ray of light
Mark Barrett at The Premise wrote an interesting commentary about the blogoshere and the mainstream media.




But at the same time, how many lessons in right-wing abuse does the Democratic Party have to endure before it notices that right-wing charges don’t have to have merit or even make sense in order to be effective. If the GOP can smear John Kerry — a combat veteran — they can smear anyone. I mean, these are the people who wore Purple Heart band-aids at their own convention during a war in order to make fun of the Democratic nominee. So why would anyone think that attacks on Barack Obama’s middle name (Hussein) or the size of his ears or some trumped up scandal involving a real estate deal would not be prosecuted to the fullest? When has truth ever had anything to do with smears from the GOP? And why didn’t Mr. Benen and Mr. Drum recognize that immediately?

(snip)

Which brings me to my last point. Anyone who’s read this blog for even a week knows that I supported John Kerry in 2004, and that I’ll support him again if he runs again. What’s surprised me over the past four months, however, is the degree to which left-leaning bloggers either gloss over their own political leanings while still advocating for particular candidates, or attack candidates they don’t like using charges as false as any leveled by the opposition party. John Kerry’s botched joke was a real wake-up call for me not because of what the GOP did, but because of how the left-leaning blogosphere and associated Democratic politicians reacted.

But again that’s only part of the story. Over the past months, with the release of the April NIA on terrorism, the release of the Iraq Study Group report, the debate about withdrawal or redeployment from Iraq, and now the call by the Bush administration for a larger military, we’ve learned that John Kerry was not only right about the policy choices we should have been making, we’ve learned that he’s where the country is on those choices as well. And yet almost no one on the left is willing to say so because that might encourage John Kerry to run again, which might muck things up for other candidates.

And I guess I don’t think that’s healthy for the Democratic Party, or honest. Sitting on one’s hands and refusing to acknowledge the truth is what bloggers used to complain about with regard to the mainstream media. And yet the more I look around these days the more I see the left-leaning blogosphere functioning not as a counter-weight to cable and network news, but as simply another pipeline for the same bias.



I think we need to take his words to heart. Most of us, if we're honest, would be thrilled to see absolutely anyone's and everyone's name attached to the missions John Kerry has been involved in since the loss in 04. And most of us would be thrilled to see someone showing the spine to stand up to take on Bush and his cartel, to stand up to the media, and to work day and night to get progressives and anti-war Veterans elected!

Yet, the blogoshere has become an echoing chamber of the media and people don't even care if they are repeating a well-known right-winged mainstream media propaganda line--as long as their 'favorite' is protected.

This has to stop!

We're only hurting ourselves when we continue to be the echoing chamber of the msm. And we need to get back to the basics.

WE WERE THE MEDIA--the HONEST MEDIA and it's what drew most of us online.

It drove us to discover the truth.

It's what drove our activism.

It's what drives our ability to be effective and get the kind of POLICIES we want--not just the personality behind the policy.


Look, I've actually spent LESS TIME online since I was swamped in pre-election activism. I also was involved in Camp Democracy. And via Camp Democracy, I became involved in the Jesselyn Radack story. Before I went to Camp Democracy, I had little knowledge about who Jesselyn Radack was or what she did. Now, I ended up deeply involved in helping her get her book published.

The point is that through all this we were discussing that the MSN DENIES us the TRUTH and that the msn worked to get neoconservative and Republican laws passed. So we were using our activism towards education and protest and building progressive policies.

What the heck happened? One day after a blue sweep in our country, policy disappeared from cyberspace and instead we have the fantasy bowl of 08 elections instead.

What I wish is that people would return their focus back onto the policy again. We have a huge chance of overturning some of these neoconservative and Republicans Bills IF we can ignore the media's glorification of the 08 race and instead return our activism to policy!

For instance, Jesselyn Radack wanted people to purchase ONE BOOK--even make a donation towards ONE book to send to EACH of the Congressman serving to get them to overturn the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Jesselyn Radack knows more about torture and prisoner abuse and the lack of Habeaous Corpus than she ever wanted to. She knows about how the Bush machine operates against dissenters. AND her story presents the reality of what happens when a government loses control of it's political servants and becomes entirely partisan based.

I asked her how many people donated or bought a book for that cause. She told me only ONE book has been purchased to send to Congress on January 3rd when they resumed. (To make a donation contact Jesselyn Radack via: general_info AT patriotictruthteller.net

This is what I mean by policy and activism--not personality. The story isn't about a political figure or a celebrity. It's about what all of us can do to affect policy. And we don't throw people like Jesselyn Radack (who isn't famous) out, because she's still fighting tooth and nail to be treated like an AMERICAN CITIZEN! What happened to her can happen to any of us and that's why we can't affort to just throw away ANY political candidates, like John Kerry or Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, etc...to jockey around for 08!

WE MUST STAY ON MESSAGE! The message is PROGRESSIVE POLICY!

To hell with personality wars.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
1. No comments? No flames?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
2. The truth hurts so they are ignoring it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. I guess. BUT how many activists have been driven away from DU
as a result of this very thing.

I know I almost left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
4. Unfortunately for Kerry, he learned way too late
that the Swiftboat smears (and related smears) didn't have to be reality based to do major damage to a campaign.

People aren't willing to forgive him that, which they see as a fumble--for not hitting back immediately and hard.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Did you read the whole thing? It's NOT about KERRY...because
the lies could affect anyone!

EVEN Jesselyn Radack--a NON POLITICIAN and a person in the ETHICS department--was LIED about on the MSM and in cyberspace.

You don't get it.

It's NOT about Kerry. It's NOT about 08. IT's about TRUTH, about POLICY, and about STAYING ON MESSAGE.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. Yes, I read the piece. I was making my own comment
about Kerry's past campaign.

I'm sorry I didn't respond in the way that pleased you.

Who wants to post on a thread where they get a hysterical response from the Opening Poster like you?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. puleese. don't hyper-exagerate my response. My caps were
for emphasis as if you didn't know.

And regardless, the past campaign is past history. The 08 election is too far away when we have means of making positive progressive changes if we would stay focused and on issue.


And after one year, then we can all look back and discuss personality then. Because frankly, Kerry is busy working on policy in the here and now. It's what every PUBLIC SERVANT should be doing. Call me 'hysterical' but do we really want a '08 Presidential candidate' to be someone who spent from 06--08 on the campaign trail? Or do we want every single one of them to ditch the politics and start making better laws?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #4
8. btw...wouldn't you love to SEE Jesselyn Radack's book that spoke
about torture, Habeous Corpus, Bush attacks on dissenters and AVERAGE Americans be handed DIRECTLY to the Congressmens office?

NOW that's ACTIVISM on policy. Not celebrity. Not partison politics.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #4
11. He did respond to them to the same level as
earlier nominees did to attacks on them. He responded by point the media to the official records first. That should have sufficed - they fully backed Kerry. (That's like proving your grades by producing a valid transcript) As a second step, his team found people who were actually their - including the only remaining officer there when he got the Silver Star. Rood is an editor an the conservative Chicago Tribune. His account, if anything made Kerry look better.

This was FAR more than the 1992 war room did. They simply got out something to mitigate the charge in the same news cycle. In many cases, they didn't disprove the charge - often because there was some truth to it.

The SBVT book that contained hundreds of charges - many contradictory was in essence a cluster bomb. At some point - after say proving 50 lies - they should have been rejected completely. Kerry had never had a reputation for dishonesty - in fact in the 90s, at one point TIME called him the most honest ma in politics (or something like that)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. This just isn't about Kerry, but what you say is mostly a fallacy.
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 12:03 PM by wisteria
Senator Kerry did fight back. In April and August. There was almost an immediate response to the attacks. I ask you were was the Democrat party's support at this time. I also ask you how did you expect him to fight the powerful media and the repub party with little extra resources to do so. Bill Clinton held the most powerful position in the US, had a great war room and PR machine, yet he had the Lewinsky scandal to deal with and that did major damage to him. Remember the Star Report and the cigar jokes that floated around for months?
The suggestion that Kerry didn't fight back is no more than a poor excuse for those who want to find some fault and reason why he shouldn't be given another chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Your premise is false about my post.
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 12:29 PM by Lex
I didn't say Kerry didn't fight back at all.

Even Kerry himself has said that he should've responded more quickly and vehemently.


"I'm sick and tired of a bunch of despicable Republicans who will not debate real policy, who won't take responsibility for their own mistakes, standing up and trying to make other people the butt of those mistakes," he said. "It disgusts me that a bunch of these Republican hacks who've never worn the uniform of our country are willing to lie about those who did."

Unsubstantiated allegations about Kerry's Vietnam War heroism from a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth figured prominently in the 2004 Kerry-Bush race. Even Kerry has blamed his slow and uncertain response to the group's claims for helping to doom his White House chances, and Democrats viewed the Tuesday fracas as a test of that lesson.

"Enough is enough. We're not going to stand for this," Kerry said. "We are going to stay in their face with the truth."


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20061031/D8L3SB884.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Show us where Kerry says
his response was "slow and uncertain" .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Don't believe the AP piece, that's fine with me.
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 01:54 PM by Lex
If you have a first hand source of what Kerry said, please do share it with us.

The piece in the OP says left-leaning bloggers are just as biased as the main-stream news. :shrug:

Believe what you want.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. Well, I doubt I can give a first hand source on anything except that
Kerry said he's skinnier and tougher and intends to fight hard for what he knows is right.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
18. It was the DEMOCRATIC PARTY'S job to fight back - we did it for Clinton's REAL mistakes
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 04:14 PM by blm
and we couldn't bring ourselves to mount an equal effort against the LIES?

Do you think Clinton could have survived his REAL mistakes if the entire party hadn't circled the wagons?

Did you see in 2004 even HALF the bigname Dems out there supporting Kerry against what they KNEW were lies? Heck - Hillary JOINED McCain and Bush on the last big lie against Kerry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I recall many prominent Dems in the party machinery tsk-tsking Clinton
when he ran in 1992 and certainly in his re-election in 96.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Hardly - and the Clinton machine WAS The party machinery in 2000, 2002 and 2004.
Fer chrissakes, from 2001 thru 2005, Clinton was PUBLICALLY and VOCALLY supportive of Bush2's major policy decisions and completely rehabbed Bush1's image for him with the public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. yep.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Because Clinton was trying to win back "Reagan Democrats" in order to win
the White House.

The Democratic Party machinery called him too conservative to be a real Democrat.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Baloney - Clinton won because certain members of Congress pounded on Bush1
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 05:39 PM by blm
throughout his entire term and the public broke faith with him because of it.

In his 1992 race, Clinton had Kerry hounding Bush1 relentlessly and exposing him on IranContra and BCCI with constant headlines questioning Bush's veracity and covert actions. Then Clinton got into office and continued the coverups on all the outstanding matters in IranContra, BCCI, Iraqgate and CIA drugrunning.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/111106.html

In 2004, Kerry had 4yrs of Clinton supporting Bush2 on almost every major policy decision he made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. Your last sentence leads me to think Kerry's loss was the Clenis' fault?!
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 07:01 PM by Lex
Wow, haven't heard it told quite that way before.

And Bill wasn't trying to win back so-called Reagan Democrats in 1992 by moving to the center?

Hmmm. Okay.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #22
33. He was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
25. And, of course, that is all you took away from the entire post about REAL ISSUES
as opposed to personality attacks?

When did Democrats decide that as a group they could ignore the truthtellers lest someone call them 'soft on national security' or something equally absurd?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #25
29. How do you know "all I took away" was what I posted?
Edited on Fri Dec-22-06 07:05 PM by Lex
:wtf:

Have you got a crystal ball? Nice try.

Some people thought Kerry was unable to be beat in 2004, but he lost anyway. And our country is much worse for it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
5. Kerry will have to fight a lot more crap this time
it's coming from all sides now, and it will be much harder for him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. All of them will have a bigger fight. It's NOT what this piece is about.
Read all of it please.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wisteria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. None of it is sticking. And, it will subside when the others are vetted.
They are using the same old comments and attacks which proves, they have nothing to work with that is new.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Jesselyn was smeared in the right-winged media too. & she's not
even 'political' in her last job in the ethics department.

This is why we have to make people see that it's deeper than personalities!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
26. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
me b zola Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
27. k&r
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
politicasista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:10 PM
Response to Original message
31. K&R!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-22-06 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
_dynamicdems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 01:38 AM
Response to Original message
34. K&R! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-23-06 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
35. I totally agree that we should drop all this useless musing regarding
the 2008 election and spend our time supporting legislation to counter the freeper years. We will have a great nominee and whoever it is I intend to work ceaselessly and intently for. Al Gore should have been in his 6th year as president or John Kerry his third and our entire world would have been the better for it. Let's stop tearing down individual candidates and change the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-24-06 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. exactly! And lets support the whistleblowers who stood up against
corruption and continue to do so!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC