Some Rhetorical Questions About Our Democratic "Leadership"

[MarianJack]

Rhetorical because I'm preaching to the choir and I pretty much know what the answers are going to be, but...

Harry Reid apologizes.

The questions are these. When, oh when, will our "leadership" realize that politics in the early 21st century is WAR?

When will they realize that in war you apologize for NOTHING?

When will they realize that, in apologizing, they make themselves look weak and their videos will wind up on he news as a visual aid to make the Dems look indecisive and incoherent, as opposed to our "bold and strong" rethuglican leaders who protect us from all things evil?

And, the one that annoys me the most, when will people on our side stop biting the bait of the right wing debate strategy that begins with the "Well, you have to admit that..." line on some rw talking point, getting the admission, then not acknowledging ANY Democratic accomplishment EVER, and then using the "see? Even YOU agree with us about..." line? Personally, my response to "You've got to admit that..." is to ask why I have to admit a God-damned thing? Especially about letting them frame the debate?

When, by the way, will we stop letting them frame the debate, like letting them get away with "intelligent design" when they MEAN "creationism"?

The Democratic leadership is standing in front of a fully stocked refrigerator and STARVING! Shit!

[sendero]

1. I couldn't believe..

.... that happened. I feel like I'm in a 5th dimension, that everything we are seeing is nothing more than a poorly scripted drama.

There is no rhyme or reason to what the Dem leadership does, I just don't get it.

[MarianJack]

3. At Breakfast This Morning,...

...ChicaAzul and I were just shaking our heads.

It was like being asked to apologise to the burglar who just picked your house clean and stole your car for calling him a thief in the police report.

UNFUCKINGBELIEVABLE!

[Punkingal]

2. They don't get it....

They just don't get it. It is demoralizing. They want to pick our Democratic candidates for us, they tell the unions who to support (I know this firsthand in Nevada), and they still are behaving as though the opposition has ethics and plays by the old rules. We need new leadership, period.

[ClassWarrior]

5. Looks to me like he's behaving as though HE has ethics.

:shrug:

And it's "he" - not "they." Since when did Harry become plural?

NGU.

[MarianJack]

6. It's Kind Of Like...

...when the Polish troops countered the Germans with Cavalry.

Not a dig at the Poles or a joke, just an example of 2 adversaries thinking on 2 different planes with disastrous results.

[Neil Lisst]

4. Every time our leadership speaks, they sound like honking geese

Harry Reid can't even say "Bush is being dishonest" without looking down to read his notes.

They have a press conference, and who do they have standing in the immediate backdrop of the shot? Henry Waxman. His votes are fine, but he looks like he belongs on the set of Revenge of the Nerds IV.

Our leadership doesn't get it. We have a sales job to do, and it doesn't matter how good you are OFF TV. If you're not a good TV face and voice, sit down and let someone else be the FACE.

Our leadership in congress doesn't lead. They stand out in front, and that's not leading, it's getting air time for yourself. Do you see big corporations using THEIR top officers to sell their craptastic products? Hell no. You see people who are better at selling, better at TV appearances, and better at connecting with a TV audience.

This is where the pubs just beat us to death. They get better TV salespeople pushing their agendas. Our leadership is too busy making sure it's their face on the tube. Reid and Pelosi couldn't sell heaters to the Inuit.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. Reid and pelosi would rather wait for global warming than to even try

to sell heaters to the Inuit.

Does any senator realize how badly we are being served by those in leadership posts? Do they care? How can 40 people suffer from collective brain block so often?

[Neil Lisst]

16. They continue to be their own media advisors.

Two days ago, they had about 100 Dem congresspeople gather for some kind of media statement, the one to which I referred earlier with Reid and Waxman. It was completely ineffective, and got little coverage.

Selling politics is an art form and a science, best left in the hands of those who understand it. Guys like Carville and Begala understand this. Reid and Pelosi don't. I can't imagine any voter under the age of 50 who would listen to them over 10 seconds.

This was a problem we had 15-20 years ago, and thank goodness, we went with a couple of youngsters in Clinton and Gore to sell the 1992 race.

We are supporters of Social Security and Medicare, but if you qualify for either, you probably need to let someone else be the face of the party.

[MarianJack]

8. I Don't Even Know If It's Nerdiness...

...as lack of conviction!

[neverevergivein]

9. What do you think is more important to Harry

His "leadership" post, or what we think is right here at DU. Seriously. Think about that everytime he apologizes or refuses to stand up to them. His life is great. Meanwhile, ours...well, not so much.

[MarianJack]

10. 90% of the time...

...I say that the more I see of Reid, the less I miss Daschiel.

But I'm SSSSSOOOOOOOOO fucking sick of Democrats apologizing and rethuglicans getting away with murder (literally).

[ClassWarrior]

11. So we have to sacrifice our ethics to save them??

Where have I heard logic like that before?... Hmmmmm...

It's more like the Democratic leadership is standing in front of a fully stocked gun rack and choosing not to become murderers.

NGU.

[MarianJack]

12. I didn't say anything about sacrificing ethics.

Too many of these apologies happen because our side tells the truth and caves when the media gives free rein to the rethuglicans to express their outrage and obscure the truth.

They've been standing in front of a gun rack and choosing to still be shot by their attackers.

[ClassWarrior]

15. Had you heard about these 30 members before you heard this story?

I hadn't. If Harry had refused to apologize, do you really think the Corporate Media Whores have covered it? Meanwhile 30 more tainted names get floated out to the public. Whether it was done intentionally or not, we may never know.

NGU.

[MrBenchley]

18. Notice that the news reports about the apology...

point out that what the Republicans demanded apologies for is stuff they actually said and did.....

[ClassWarrior]

Notice that the news reports point out that Harry...

...apologized for what his staff did. So what's your point?

NGU.

[MrBenchley]

22. And so Harry comes across as gentleman

and the GOP comes across as hypocritical thugs.

[MarianJack]

20. But the Lead is still...

...the apology.

[ClassWarrior]

21. So?

You said we shouldn’t apologize when we’re wrong, because the Cons don’t apologize when they’re wrong. Now where I come from, when you’re wrong, the ethical thing to do is apologize.

Christ, the reason I’m a Dem is because the Dems are the party of decent, honorable people. And I really resent people who come here and tell us we need be less decent and honorable in order to win.

NGU.

[MarianJack]

23. I didn't say don't apologise when you're wrong,...

...I said apologise for nothing. Very close and I can see your interpretation.

I'm a Dem for the same reasons as you. What is frustrating me is that they apologize too damn much for telling the truth. Not a good strategy when you have so much truth to tell.

As far as the "So?", the 30 rethugs aren't being mentioned in any of the reports I've seen, just "Harry Reid Apologizes"

Overall, I think that this is a symptom of being afraid of what the media says, and not seeing that the media is going to slam you anyway. I'd rather do things in a gentlemanly way, but that is not what is going to turn the tide.

[ClassWarrior]

24. The truth??

So if you're under investigation for murder, and I call you a murderer, I'm telling the truth?

Sorry, doesn't work that way. Not when you're being ethical.

NGU.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

28. but is it unethical to call me a murder suspect? No.

I really don't think we are disagreeing. It is a matter of a few degrees of separation, nothing more.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

26. there is being ethical, and there is telling the truth. since when did

truth-telling become something to apologize for? (other than the current administration)

I agree, bashing for bashing's sake is a waste, self-defeating and improper. But telling the truth about the corruption that oozes out of today's GOP - that is nothing but fact.
politeness and ethics do not prevent me from calling Intelligent Design insane, Creationism wacky or their promoters evil.

[ClassWarrior]

27. (see post #24 above)

NGU.

[msongs]

13. umm, who had ethics, the jews or the nazis? how often did hitler apologize

for anything? Maybe, sorry for stepping on your toe, hermann, or sorry for spilling the gravy, siegfried, but sorry for invading poland?

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[ClassWarrior]

17. Yes, we Progressives need to be more like Hitler.

:eyes:

NGU.

[jarab]

14. It takes years to achieve the level of debate ...

now "perfected" by the dark side.
I would like to see signs that we've begun to understand how the game is played.
It doesn't surprise me that it's so easy for them to paint us as flip floppers and weak (on defense especially).

We need a contingent of spokesmen with our own daily talking points, and we need to keep the Colmes/Myers of the world muffled when it comes to speaking for the party. They aren't helping, and in some cases are hurting.
I would submit that our party, being broader based, is harder to defend with many more targets than the other side has.

What happened to the Mario Cuomos of our party? Hell, what happened to Mario Cuomo? Just when we seem to have all the ammo for the struggle at hand, the other side invents another weapon requiring another caliber - and we abide by the Queensbury rules all over again.

I say pull these weak Democrats out from in front of the cameras. Get a dozen or so spokesmen who are real Democrats and stick with them. It is possible to be anti-war without "appearing" to be radical.
Oh, yeah, (e.g.) we'll hear from Michael Moore when he has another capitalistic venture he wants to push.

We are weak at this political game!! The "game" is a "war" (agreed).

...O...

[MarianJack]

19. Sometimes I Think That We Really Haven't Recovered From 1988

The big problem in that election, IMHO, was that Dukakis VASTLY overestimated the intelligence and thoughtfulness of those he sought to govern and bush sr didn't.

The rethuglicans know that the public responds to NOISE. They also continue to know that the public responds to the old John Wayne line. "Don't apologise. It's a sign of weakness!" Bullshit yes! But if we don't start speaking in terms that the public understands, we're FUCKED!

I'm tired of Democratic leadership that parrots Kevin Bacon's "Thank You Sir, May I Have Another?"

[jarab]

25. Or maybe '94 ...

When they metaphorically said, "Screw you!" with the Contract, and we since have been cooing, ""Ooh, it hurts so good; take it out a little deeper!".

We're actually screwing ourselves in our conduct before the MSM.
I often think it would be better that they give their talking points without our presence.
Better to be silent and be thought a fool than open one's mouth and remove all doubt.
You are correct; they proved that the decibel level is more important than the message.

...O...