Your misery has been "packaged as one heckuva show" America!!!!!!

[Tsiyu]

I have been chastised for not "getting" Frank Rich. I get him, allright. Oh, at first I assumed he was a drug-addled pathetic thing you had to re-direct like a child.

But I've realized something. He's not demented or naive. He's just another one in a long line of cold-hearted, out-of-touch Big Boys. Yay for him.


"But as long as the Democrats keep repeating their own mistakes, they will lose to the party whose mistakes are, if nothing else, packaged as one heckuva show. It's better to have the courage of bad convictions than no courage or convictions at all."

Frank Rich June 18, 2006



Those two statements have been rumbling around in my head since I first read them. I had a real :wtf: moment trying to cut to this man's pathetic chase.



But now I get it. Rich doesn't give a flying Freedom Fry about America. He's merely a happy, well-fed spectator, enjoying the view.

And what a "heckuva show!"

Maybe Big Frank hung out in a chopper over New Orleans, munching on popcorn as he enjoyed the sight of drowning people screaming for help?

Or perhaps he hangs out at the checkout at the local superstore, watching seniors pick drugs over food?

Did he enjoy standing outside of polling places in Democratic-leaning communities, watching people stand in line for hours to vote and finally giving up and going home? (Oh, wait! There is no such thing as voter fraud. Only "weak" Democrats!)

Oh, I know. I bet he's been replaying scenes of our soldiers and Iraqi children getting blown up! Watching those arms and legs fly off is just one heckuva show, ain't it, Big Frank? Bet you hang out at the VA hospital and take pictures of all the dismembered Vets for shits and giggles, eh, Big Frank?

And all those women and gays squirming because they might have their naughty parts completely regulated by the government, ain't that just somethin' to see?

Oh and do not forget the corruption from one end to the other in the Republican leadership. That's been most exciting: shooting people in the face with impunity, spying on Americans, pissing on the Constitution. You kind of like it when they piss on your Constitution, dontcha, Frank? It just makes a great story, the way that sacred document - the one on which this nation was founded - gets trashed by the Other Big Boys. Tee-hee! Pass the popcorn!



Am I the only one who finds this attitude to be completely soulless and out-of-touch with America? If Rich were really "in the know" wouldn't he be focusing on the Repukes sinking image? Don't polls show Bush with a 70% disapproval rating, and the Iraq war running about the same numbers? How does this put Democrats in the hole? When you're wrong, you're still not wrong? When people distrust and disapprove of you, they really don't mean it?



Dems are putting on a show. The media do not cover that "heckuva show." It doesn't fit in with the agenda, but that does not mean America is buying YOUR brand of bullshit, Most Esteemed High Holy Poobah Rich.

And this statement: "It's better to have the courage of bad convictions than no courage or convictions at all."


Well, that just beats all.

You've pretty much summed up most of the journalists in America, Big Boy! Your convictions are to money and special interests and I'm sure getting into the right sort of fun little parties.

Millions of fed up Americans (the ones you enjoy seeing suffer - "heckuva show!!!!") may lack the courage or conviction to speak out right at this moment. This does not make you - who speaketh out of his ass with much conviction and courage - a "better" person.

They'll find their voice, and drown yours out.

But you, Mr. Rich, may never find your soul.

[babylonsister]

1. As much as it pains me to see Rich chastize Dems, it's

deserved for the most part.
They have a sterling opportunity to shine when compared to the repugs, and they still seem to be in disarray. And yes, I realize they're the minority party, but they aren't capitalizing on the quagmire the repugs are in. I think Rich is as disgusted as I am. If only the Dems would listen.

[Tsiyu]

2. What can Dems do?

really?


I feel this way as well sometimes: that Dems aren't trying. And it's true. Some are not. But many are.

What can they realistically do?

At the rate Repukes are going, even if Dems do nothing the populace still sides with the Dems.
But the media do not care.

What does anyone like Rich ever suggest? How do they suggest Dems get the attention of the media?

He speaks of Rove in glowing terms as far as "storytelling" but really, this is not a fairy tale. If it's so "urgent" that Dems get their message out, why not help spread that message rather than drooling all over an ego-maniac because "He's repetetive. Gee willikers! It works."?

I don't care if the DNC hires all the Hooters girls and sponsors the winning NASCAR driver and auctions off Brad and Angelina's baby for the campaign, the media STILL would not cover it.

If a journalist/columnist/American today wants to express concern, trashing Dem strategy is the cheap shot. It's an easy column to write.

It's a bit more dangerous to actually buck the system and trash DIEBOLD and a complicit media.

Courage, Yuh.......:eyes:

[Armstead]

5. For one thing, the Democrats could go after the media Monopolies

One way the Democrats could counter the media spin and apathy is to go on the warpath against the MSM, bot in front of the cameras, and by addressing the policies that have made the media so awful today.

For too many years, the Democrats were accomplises in the Monopolization of the Media by a handful of corporate giants. With a few noble exceptions, the Democrats failed to challenge the continuing deregulation of media ownership that put the media into so few hands. They failed to challenge the core lies that were spread, suchg as "allowing fewer owners will result in more diversity of ownership."

So in that sense, the democrats are also to blame for the mess they are in today, as far as the media goes. It pissed me off in the 80's and 90's, and yet the Dems are still basically apathetic and silent as this process of consolidation and monopolization continues.

Alsom in front of the cameras, how about encouraging a more diverse array of Democrats to get on the talk shows -- AND pressuring the media to allow a more diverse array of Democrats to appear. Why is it always the same old, same grey faces saying grey things on the panel shows? Why is Joe Biden -- with his muddled non-message -- always the "spokesman" for the left half of the spectrum, while people with real fire and passion and new ideas arte nowhere to be seen.

In short, there's a LOT the Democratsd could do to addrtess this problem. But they still keep making the same-old, same-old mistakes and miss the same opportunities they've been missing for 30 years.

[acmejack]

3. What do you think Frank makes a year?

Frank is quite comfortable you can be sure. So he is completely detached and has no personal stake in this, the status quo is very good to Mr. Rich, so he is quite content to see things as they are. His retirement is assured, he is not a paycheck or two from disaster, he doesn't have to worry about a medical emergency in the family destroying him.

It is important to remember that lens colors his commentary...

[Tsiyu]

6. Of course

The 'forest for the trees' syndrome in all its glory.

I'm sick of all the pontificating and bullshit. Why not cover something vital a Dem had to say this week?

No, let's just point out all their silly mistakes. Our nation as musical, as theatre. Give it up.

I'm just disgusted with the childish banter coming from all sides while problems only get worse.

Take a stand on right or wrong or else shut the fuck up with the "reviews." Know what I mean, acmejack? :hi:

[Armstead]

4. At the risk of being redundant, you don't "get" him

(I've never said that to you before. Just responding to your post.)

Rich is correct, and is describing the problem well, as rotten as the truth may be. he's not really saying it's "better" to have the courge of bad convictions. Rather he is saying that it is more politically effective than to not have any convictions at all.

The GOP does put on a "helluva show" and they have been since the 1970's. By comparison, the Democrats keep "bombing in New Haven" (to continue with the theatrical metaphor) because we have no clue as to a coherent message and set of policies.

That is a core problem of the Democrats and liberalism. We have no coherent script, and no coherent vision anymore, and most of our actors (not all) ar4e afraid to sink their teeth into their roles.

The GOP got and held power because they know how to package their bad ideas in a slick way that seems to make sense to average Americans, and seems inspiring....Their ideas and actions are bad, and would horrify the audience without the deceptive packaging. BUT the GOP knows how to distract from the downside of their agenda, and are good at magic tricks.

The Dems and liberalism, on the other hand, should have an equally clear and forceful andf inspiring story that could win over the average person. But instead of presenting that, we turn out dull tripe. We imitate the GOP's story, and offer a pale substitute, rather than a true alternative.

Yes, the results of this contrast in the real world are anything but entertaining. It is tragic. But part of teh GOP magic trick is to either get the audience to forgive them and look the other way, and to divert attention and make it seem like it's the Democrats and "leftist elite" who are at fault.

The point that Rich is making is that the Democrats have to get a core set of principles and becaome better at packaging and the "show biz" aspects of electoral politics.

[Tsiyu]

7. What part about our side winning in the polls

on everything from the president's approval rating to the War on Iraq to the environment do you and Rich not get?

This is what really stuns me here. You and Rich aren't kept mesmerized by the "story," but that is YOUR story.

The real "story" is out there in America-land. The real story is that real Americans have turned away from the Repukes in droves. That's the story deserving of focus. Does the president have to get a 5% approval rating before some will wake up and realize that America gets the Dem message, even if it seems incoherent and dull to YOU?

The Dems are reticent and restrained, yes, with good reason. Even their best efforts are ripped apart by the media, who are not friends of our party.

Hey! There's a "heckuva story" there somewhere. You know - how the media refuses to cover politics fairly? How the NYT basically does Rove's bidding? There's some intrigue and malfeasance there to dig into, but no, let's attack Dems instead.

How about that DIEBOLD story? What about that? If a Dem speaks out about it will the media cover that succulent story? As juicy and showbiz as that story is to many, many Americans, the media isn't going to pass along the fact that American voters are getting screwed. We get another round of "tinfoil hat time!"

"Showbiz" isn't going to cut it this time. Poeple need the truth and they need columnists to get off their high horses and walk down here with the rest of us. Americans "get it."

I will never "get" a guy like Rich. The aesthetics of politics is a parlor game we do not have the luxury of playing presently.

[Armstead]

8. Bush's approval drop doesn't mean Democratic success

(Let me emphasize that I am not referring to all Democrats below. There are numerous notable exceptions at all levels. However the fact that they are exceptions, rather than the norm is the problem.)

The story in the Heartland is that peopel are now getting fed up with BOTH parties. The difference now is that they are including the GOP in that -- but they see the Democrats as almsot as bad, and just as IRRELEVANT.

IRRELEVANT is the key term there. There are plenty of Big Issues to grab onto. Corporate dominancce of our economy, political process and society is at the root of much of it. People understand that -- but they don't see the Democrats taking on the concerns that really affect them.

Bush and the GOP's low ratings also reflect the desertions of conservatives. That is not a base the democrats can realistically count on. Those will most likely do the right wing equivalent of the "hold your nose and vote" strategy of Democratic "centrists."

So, until the Democratic party makes a break with its' own oppressive status quo, the only possible chance the Democrats have to turn the tide in 06 and 08 is to hope that enough voters will decide to "Throw the Big Bastards Out" and "Settle for the Lesser Bastards." Not exactly a strong strategy.

The time is ripe for the liberal/progressive/Dermocratic equivalent of the Reagan Revolution, in terms of a change in course that would both go after the problem and provide an inspiring alternative that people would actually support.

But to do that requires a mix of substnce and show biz. It requires the Democrats to take a clear stand in the basic equation of The People Vs. the Power.

But the Democratic Establishment seems both unwilling and unable to take the large stands that are required, or actually presenting a Big Picture Plan that is more than just "We're a littrle nicer than the Republicans."

For example, the Mergermania and Monopolization of all sectors of society continues unabated, as it has for 30 years. But what are the Democrats saying about it NOW? Not a whole lot. It's the same enabling silence. They are ignoring one of the key issues of our time, and instead keep chipping around the margins, as always...The Democrats also continue to turn to the same Wall Street Elite and the same corporate values that have made them into eunichs who are either incapable or unwilling to really stand out.

Back to the "show biz" metaphor. Progressive populist liberalism can be very compelling -- and can directly counter the image of the Democrats as pale imitations of Republicans. It's what could unite a majority of the country who disapproves of the trends of the last 30 years in terms of Money and Power.

REAL progressive populism is also what is needed in terms of SUBSTANCE. The majority of peopoe -- from middle class to lower class -- are getting screwed by the oligarchy -- and they know it. They just need political leadership who is willing to both articulate it and put the specifics into a larger package that is coherent.

In other words "show biz" based on substance and truth.

[Tsiyu]

9. As I said earlier

No matter the snazzy campaign - the media won't cover it adequately or fairly.

Is Rich taking on the media? No, just bash the Dems.

Is Rich trashing DIEBOLD? Nah. Too much risk. Just bash the Dems.

We have many local races to consider. A blanket campaign will do less to appeal to Heartland Americans than targeted campaigns focusing on local issues.

For example, Corker (TN) Repuke, is already running anti-immigration ads here. That's his platform. If the Dems come up with some blanket popular plan, how are they going to address this particular state relating to that one issue?

The challenge to Democrats is not to put on one big show, but to put on many excellent small shows to pull in the votes. Each challenger has to know where his or her opponent stands and focus on those issues relevant to that community. This is easier said than done, and hopefully individual dems are working on regional strategies. Putting on a dog and pony show with a lot of nice, grammatically-correct phrases and snazzy packaging might appeal to the media, but Americans want more than a show.

They want a country that works. They are ready for change. Dem candidates do not need to hang out in DC writing catchy jingles and working on brand recognition.

They need to get out there and meet the people and PROVE that they will be accessible and responsible to their future constituency. People are tired of the sales pitches.

[Armstead]

10. Well, at least you agree on the "show" aspect if not on scale

IMO if I were king of the Democratic Party I would have an overasll vision and message on the core issues that sets up a strong unified message without precluding individualds from taking their own positions.

As for the media, that's just an excuse.

The Democrats have a Big Stick that you are forgetting about. They do have an impact on communications policies and regulation. While the GOP does have the upper hand, the Democrats still have the potential (and in some cases real) power to tighteb the reins on these media giants. And the media knows that nothing is permanent, and that the Dems may well be calling the shots.

So Democrats ought to be reminding the media that they havce public service obligations to be fair to all sides.

Also, the Democrats can be more pro-active in otehr ways. The problem is not that tye media is deliberatly leaving them out. The problem is that the media takes the path of least resistance. They book the sme old names, and go to tyhe same old sources for press releases and info.

But the media does like drama. And it's up to the Democrats to provide that drama. If there is a strong relentless core message and actions coming out of the Democratic Party, the media can't ignore it.

[Tsiyu]

13. The point of my post

is that we've had enough drama.

Making light of Americans' problems is just too cold.

Enough.



As for holding media accountable, there will come a time when we may see the possibility. Repukes are not going to relinquish any control until they are out of power, no matter what Dems do. The media are private endeavors and they are in lockstep with the NeoCon agenda.

People with big mouths and big wallets might want to leave their cushy jobs and salaries and get together to form more alternative media. It would be a courageous and timely thing to do, but it seems it is much easier for the more fortunate man to rub our noses in the mess.

It's gotten so easy to blast Democrats, but they didn't create the problems we're having. Did they enable the Neocons? Do they still? Sure. But so has the NYT, so spare me the blame, Rich. There is plenty to go around.

And thanks for the conversation. There's a method to the madness.

[sandnsea]

11. I get what you're saying, I think

I didn't read the Rich column, who the fuck needs to read another pompous ass sanctimoniously ripping up Democrats. I think that's your point. Who cares.

If Democrats aren't telling a story that Rich thinks needs to be told, then why doesn't he get off his pompous ass, come out here to my house or yours, and get the damned story himself. That's the job of journalists and op-ed writers too.

Maybe if he did that, he'd be in a better position to recognize when Democrats ARE telling that story and he'd be able to write about that instead of his own brand of verbose blather which actually shows he's as out of touch with Americans as he claims Democrats are.

Is that about it?

[Tsiyu]

14. You got it just about all the way

I don't dislike Rich any more than anyone else. Every last SOB is on my radar.

That's because my bullshit meter got overloaded. There's so much bullshit out there, it's time to send a few arrows back.

Not that he or anyone else gives a shit what I have to say. I'm gonna say it anyway. I'm fed up. Every person I KNOW is fed up.

And it's just bullshit. Bullshit. More bullshit.

Find the story, Rich, if you are such a brilliant writer.



Thanks sandnsea

[Cal_Dem]

12. Great post! Would you please write in and describe...

...the experiences you've had waiting in line in Democratic-leaning precincts until it got dark and had to go home? Which ones of you did not get a vote as a result? I'm writing a paper on the stolen election and I wanted to include as many real-life experiences, and what it did to your lives, as possible. Thanks!