David Brooks on John Edwards

David Brooks on John Edwards

David Brooks has written a column in today's NYT (NYT Select) about the contrast that he clearly sees between John Edwards and John Kerry in light of the Democratic voters and what they are looking for in leadership. In my opinion, Mr. Brooks gives the first honest mainstream view of the two speeches, rather than lumping them together and calling them "withering attacks" on Bush, as so many newspapers unfairly did this week. He begins his piece this way:

John Kerry and John Edwards ran for office together and they lost together, and they both gave major speeches about Katrina this week, but there the similarity ends. The two men might as well live in different worlds.

He goes on to explain how he believes the Kerry-Edwards contrast is characteristic of the argument that now causes division within the Democratic Party.

On one side are those who believe that the party's essential problem is with its political style. On the other side are those who believe that the Democratic defeats flow from policy problems, not from campaign style or message framing. They don't believe that Democrats can win wrapped in their own rage, or kowtowing endlessly to their psychologically aggrieved donor base. For them, the crucial challenge is to come up with policies more in tune with voters...Kerry speaks for the first group, which believes in more partisanship, and Edwards for the second, which believes in less.

Mr. Brooks does not believe the Democratic party will snap back to the centrism of Bill Clinton, and neither do I. If Democrats are going to come back and succeed, they need to do it with a leader who is not a Bill Clinton-clone. Clinton did an excellent job as President in his time, but that time will have been "eight years gone" by the next Presidential election. I think most people would agree with me when I say that the world has drastically changed since President Clinton presided over this nation.

John Edwards's speech had a different feel. Edwards took some hard shots at Bush, some of them deserved, but having left Washington after the election, Edwards is not so obsessed with power struggles. In his talk he roamed outward and spoke about the complexities of actual life.

Democrats need a liberal populist with solid and innovative ideas; who is not afraid to be himself (or herself); an eloquent-yet-straight-shooting communicator; someone who will stick by his (or her) own convictions without hesitation or equivocation. If you ask me, that leader is John Edwards. When he says he believes in one America for all of us, I believe him because I can hear it in his tone and in his ideas. I think he's a natural. I'll bet that he'll convince many others as days go on.

____________

Update: At Daily Kos, davidkc says that he believes that David Brooks incorrectly concluded that Dems must choose one side or the other as it decides where it wants to go in the future, and this is a false choice...Dems need to do both. I don't think it's so much of a "false choice" as it is good, plainspoken advice. We do need to move ahead with creativity and innovative ideas about how we can govern better, while not being intimidated by criticizing the obvious shortcomings of the Bush administration.

See this related Daily Kos entry, too. A commenter named "briannowhere" says we need a candidate who has a clear and inventive message:

The Democrats are suffering from a lack of imagination. Nothing more. They way to win the hearts and minds of Americans is to buck the status quo and start thinking outside the box. I think Edwards has the best potential to be the candidate who comes closest to that (while also being realistcally electable). I truly get the sense from him that he actually cares about the issue of poverty and it's effects and does not seem to be simply playing lip service to the notion of helping communities change.

Related:
See - The Return of John Edwards [TPM Cafe]

What will Edwards bring? Edwards will bring the progressive ideology to heal the nations wounds. He has liberalism diplomatic skills that would enhance our standing in the world. He would appoint competent Secretary of Defense that would end the War in Iraq. We would finally see a domestic approach aimed at reducing the levels of poverty, protecting minority rights, expanding healthcare, more funding for education, reform Social Security, ending tax and corporate loopholes benefitting the rich, more jobs, and a national security aimed at protecting it’s citizens. He would work to unite the country and end the constant bickering between our nations top parties.

Quote of the Day - Arianna on Blogs

Quote of the Day - Arianna on Blogs

"When bloggers decide that something matters, they chomp down hard and refuse to let go. They're the true pit bulls of reporting. The only way to get them off a story is to cut off their heads (and even then you'll need to pry their jaws open). They almost all work alone, but, ironically, it's their collective effort that makes them so effective. They share their work freely, feed off one another's work, argue with each other, and add to the story dialectically. All of which has made the blogosphere the most vital news source in our country -- and led me to take a flying leap into it with The Huffington Post."

- - Arianna Huffington in an interview with Wired News

* A tip o'the hat to the Gawker, whose big story today is a National Enquirer story about George W. Bush - believe it or not. Justin Frank is quoted in the NE article - see my August 2004 review of Dr. Frank's book here or at DKosopedia.

In the GOP, It's Suddenly Every Man for Himself

The Threat - gulp!

In the GOP, It's Suddenly
Every Man for Himself

I looked at Dana Milbank's latest WaPo article, and I could just imagine what another Category 5 hurricane, fast approaching the Texas coast, might do to the GOP and their hideous scrambling jumble of political self-preservation.

This week, I think I've heard it all. President Bush says we'll spend like [wise and honest] drunken sailors to rebuild New Orleans, with Karl Rove at the helm. Halliburton will profiteer. New Orleans workers will have their wages slashed while millionaire cronies walk away with their pockets full. Not one fat-cat will be left behind - every tax-cut promise to the richest will be kept.

But what's THIS I'm hearing!? Treasury Secretary John W. Snow says that hurricane recovery spending will push the GOP's plans to extend the tax cuts to the back burner for this year.

But what's THIS I'm hearing!?! The Washington Post reported Sept. 9 that Treasury Secretary John Snow is once again being shown the door. His rumored replacement is White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, who would then be replaced either by Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove or Office of Management and Budget Director Josh Bolten. [Washington Times]

Dick Cheney said he sees no need for a "czar" to oversee the Katrina response.

But what's THIS I'm hearing? Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said after meeting with administration figures yesterday: "I feel we need a czar, an administrator."

Tom Delay (R-Tex.) asserted last week that the GOP majority had "pared... down" federal spending so well that there was no more fat to be found. There ain't no pork. As DeLay said about the budget, "After 11 years of Republican majority, we've pared it down pretty good."

But what's THIS I'm hearing? The weeping hypocrite Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) is telling us that the evil Washington Times made up these Tom Delay quotes. [see Atrios]

But what's THIS I'm hearing!? The chickenhawks of Congress have come up with a tough-guy sounding "Operation Offset" to balance Hurricane Katrina recovery costs with other federal spending reductions. The brave and brawny National Taxpayers Union (NTU) has reported "ready for duty," armed with budget restraints to make any social Democrat's bleeding heart stop beating.

_________
Don't take my pork!.................Pork? What pork?

I thought that Speaker of the House Denny Hastert looked like he was going to toss his cookies today when he was put on the spot about House minority leader Nancy Pelosi's challenge to him - daring him to commit to giving up his precious pork.

The messages are swirling. We feel like we're spinning in hurricane-induced whirlpools. How can we be one America when it's every man for himself?

I agree with what Jonathan Chait has said about the GOP - "the usual guideline in these kinds of circumstances is craziest man wins."

> 1,900

> 1,900
The war in Iraq passed a sobering milepost Tuesday when U.S. officials reported 12 more Americans were killed — eight of them members of the armed forces, raising to more than 1,900 the number of U.S. service members who have died in the country since the invasion. [Houston Chronicle]

John Edwards' Speech at Center for American Progress

John Edwards' Speech at Center for American Progress

Restoring the American Dream
An excerpt from my guest-blog at the One America blog:

John Edwards assures us that a war on Poverty is not a futile one. He envisions what he calls the Working Society, where every American who works hard should have tangible rewards to show for it, whether it's a home, a savings account, a chance to get ahead, an education, a safe neighborhood, or easier access to a job. It is based upon the principle that no one succeeds on their own and it strengthens our national community by making the pact that, if you're willing to hold up your end of the bargain, the Working Society will make sure you are able to get ahead, and not just get by.

What I appreciate most about Sen. Edwards is that, unlike any Democrat today, he has forwarded concrete ideas that will make a real difference in the personal lives of so many poor and hard-working Americans who aren't looking for a hand-out, but are instead willing, responsible, and enthusiastic partners in the Working Society. The ideas he brings to us are not ideas to benefit the poor alone; they are for all of us - one America. With our eyes focused upon a higher purpose and a new social compact, we will be a stronger national community.

I wish to end with some lines from a song that increased my own awareness of Poverty many years ago, and it reinforces John Edwards' hope to see fewer Americans living "just a bank account away" from the American dream. It's by one of my favorite songwriters, Nanci Griffith:

Can you spare the time?
Can you spare a dime?
Can you look me in the eye?
I'm down 'n' out
And I am lonely
Do you ever think of me on
Sunday?
No. I don't live
Across the water
Hey, I live right here
On this corner
...just a bank account away from
America.

- from the song Down 'N' Outer by Nanci Griffith

Blogs:

See Ezra Klein's Been A Long Time Since I Had This Feeling


Comments in the media:

Thomas Oliphant: Edwards got it right about poverty [Boston Globe]

Dan Balz uses the angle that the Edwards speech was one of three recent public appearances (Bill Clinton, Edwards, Kerry) that was an opportunity to criticize the handling of Katrina'a aftermath. While that may be so, in part, I would be disappointed to think that's the main point that most people might take away about Edwards' speech after reading the Washington Post article. The speech was brimming with new ideas, something you rarely see (or hear about) in the Democratic party these days. I noticed that Tracey Schmitt, press secretary for the Republican National Committee, had accused Edwards of attempting to politicize the tragedy along the Gulf Coast. It looks like Dan Balz wrote his piece all around the RNC fear. I think we miss a lot of constructive ideas when politics get in the way, but that's how the big show goes on, I suppose.

Chaos In Iraq Today

Chaos In Iraq Today

This is opening up a can of worms. I'd be remiss not to bring it to your attention.

In the WSJ, Yochi J. Dreazen says that new doubts are being raised about the U.S.-led coalition's strategy for pacifying southern Iraq by giving free rein to Shiite religious militias with ties to neighboring Iran.

Juan Cole says the NYT has the only version that makes any sense.

A spokesman for Moqtada al-Sadr has accused Abu Musab al-Zarqawi of dividing Shiites.

The British papers are mulling over what this means - and what comes next.

The Telegraph has asked the public for their comments - do they see a civil war in Iraq today?

Dem Leadership Should Take This Advice

Dem Leadership Should Take This Advice
Markos had some words for Dem leadership that I found to be excellent advice.

Iraq is only going to get worse. There is little danger in calling for a troop withdrawl upon approval of the Iraqi Constitution. Most Americans don't expect us to hold Iraq's hand for the long-term. It's their country, they're going to have to survive on their own. While "we broke it, we fix it" has its moral attractiveness, fact is we can't fix it. Only Iraq can, and we must let them do so..We also need the money and troops to help rebuild the gulf coast and prepare for the next big disaster. Katrina was definitely not the last we'll face.

Serious Democrats cannot take a muddled approach to Iraq. "Staying the course" is a phrase that has become meaningless to Americans, who are not stupid and can see that "the course" has produced disastrous results, and we have not learned from these mistakes because the president won't admit he made any. Polls show that Americans are afraid and non-trusting on the issue of this war. They need to hear that there is, indeed, a timetable for bringing our troops back. More than that, Americans are caring people, and they know we've gone in and bombed the hell out of Iraq - and we aren't the kind of society that would run from an obligation to assist in rebuilding the country. Like it or not, Bush committed us to this mess and we will never regain any international respect if we break a nation and fail to assist in fixing a new infrastructure.

The window of opportunity is not closed. Most Democrats can support a pull-out now and escape appearances of pandering (especially with Katrina as cover). But if they wait until next year as Iraq burns hotter and public support for the war falls further, and suddenly announce a big turnabout on the war, they will be every bit the panderers they appear to be. And if they continue supporting the war, they'll simply be supporting a failed adventure with no hope of success..In other words, Democrats can still get ahead of the issue, or they'll be on the wrong side of history next year. But that window of opportunity is closing fast.

Now is the time. Now. Now. Now. Before anti-war protestors clash with pro-war supporters. Before things in Iraq get worse. Before FOX News and National Review morph the public's opinion of you into silent supporters of "the course" and we send more soldiers to die. Americans are intelligent and intuitive people. Trust them. They'll trust you if you do.

Read Kos' entire post on this issue.

Sheehan Manhandled by Authorities at Peaceful NYC Rally

Sheehan Manhandled by Authorities at Peaceful NYC Rally



I picked this one up from Common Ills. It appears that Cindy Sheehan was manhandled yesterday by the New York City authorities.

I attended a Bring Them Home Now rally last week, and I can tell you, in no uncertain terms, that these people are intelligent, introspective, and they do not promote any kind of violence. In Syracuse, some of the speakers engaged those in the crowd who had oppositional beliefs with respect and entertained their concerns.

I'm disgusted that the authorities would have treated Mrs. Sheehan in this manner, whether or not the paperwork had been properly filed.

Posse Comitatus Revisited

Posse Comitatus

"The Dims will raise a great cry against this in an attempt to style themselves defenders of liberty."

- Freeper quote, exposing the fear that surrounds the Bush administration's revisiting of the Posse Comitatus Act.

I can just hear Gore Vidal saying, "I told you so." We cannot allow the Bush administration to turn us into a banana republic with a wealth-filthy class on one side of a divide, a deep canyon in between, and the rest of us on the other side - with our own military policing our side. That's a sickening thought.

"Americans need to rethink how to protect the country curtailing the rights and the privileges of the free society that we defend."

- Gore Vidal

*tip o' the hat to Pam Spaulding on the Freeper quote

Bob Livingston Boggles Minds

Bob Livingston Boggles Minds
...with his absurd finger-pointing

At Think Progress, Judd exposes former Congressman Bob Livingston for the boob he appears to be. Still blaming Clinton - for things he's never had control over. I got this tip from Andrew Sullivan, who calls it mind boggling.

Five years into the Clnton Presidency -

"I would like to note that the current economic expansion is now entering its seventh year. That makes it already a long upswing by historical standards. And yet, looking ahead, the prospects for sustaining the expansion are quite favorable."

- Alan Greenspan, March 20, 1997

Those were the days.

Clinton Disappoints on Iraq

Clinton Disappoints on Iraq

I believe that Bill Clinton was one of the best presidents this country has ever had. He was an excellent diplomat, and I saw him being a very good diplomat yesterday at exactly the when he shouldn't have been. I thought that former President Clinton was far too careful yesterday when he was interviewed about the Iraq war by Tim Russert on Meet the Press. In an atmosphere where I don't just suspect, but I know that I (and all Americans) have been lied to - flat out and bold faced - by our President, platitudes, soft criticism, and wimpy rationalizations just don't engender my trust or warrant my respect. Those who care about America understand that America is worth fighting for. I want a man or woman of firm and undeniable conviction to say the words to Tim Russert or George Stephanopoulos which give clear indication and acknowledgement that we've been bamboozled on Iraq - that it's clearly a disaster - and that we must change the course - and not throw one more troop's body to the Iraqi civil war until we can show that we're capable of cooperating with international allies to organize a protective force for innocent citizens while their burgeoning democracy is "growing up".

Bill Clinton didn't do that. If you ask me, he looked like a bowl of cold pablum.

I was disappointed in his performance. What he did gives every one of the right wingnuts who tried to destroy his own presidency the ammunition to continue to attack Democrats of conviction - like his own VP Al Gore.

Arianna Huffington commented on her belief that Russert dropped the ball and how National Review moved in to take Clinton's cold pablum on Iraq and spin it into more of Bush's Fools' Gold.

There's a fallacy about this being the first time one former American President has publically criticized the incumbent President. It's being spread by Powerline, and it stems from an AFP report with an overdramatic (and decidedly false) headline ["Clinton launches withering attack on Bush"] :

"Breaking with tradition under which US presidents mute criticisms of their successors, Clinton said the Bush administration had decided to invade Iraq "virtually alone and before UN inspections were completed, with no real urgency, no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction."

First of all, that's not a "withering attack." It's the damned TRUTH. Only a fool or a blind partisan couldn't tell the difference.

John Hinderaker speaks of the public criticism, saying, "This has never happened before," which is totally false. High-profile blogger should be careful about disseminating obvious disinformation.

________

UPDATE: Arianna has more on this today (Sept 20). See Bill Clinton's Muddled Attempt to Own the Middle

Nat'l Voter ID Card Could Disenfranchise Millions

National Voter ID Card Could Disenfranchise Millions

At 10:35 am ET, President Bush will receive former President Carter and James Baker's election reform report. There's something contained within that report that is dismaying for any libertarian-leaning citizen to learn. Millions of Americans will likely be made ineligible to vote in elections should legislation be enacted to require national voter ID cards. It is believed that it would also inevitably disenfranchise minority voters, along with those who live in poverty and the elderly. In a shocking turn of events, Raw Story reports that a voting reform commission which has already taken heat for playing host to sham voting rights groups run by members of the Bush-Cheney campaign has now recommended the institution of a national voter ID card. What is particularly disturbing is that civil rights groups had essentially been barred from testifying about their concerns. You can the Commission on Federal Election Reform here (pdf).

UPDATE: Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL), Chris Dodd (D-CT), and Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) will hold a 2:15 pm ET press conference to voice their opposition to a recommendation made by the Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform which would require all Americans to show photo identification before voting. [Source:TheNote/ABC]

Hypocritical Times

Hypocritical Times

We're living in hypocritical times. We are aware that the US went into heavy deficits four years ago. The Bush administration has taken us to two wars - one in Afghanistan and the other in Iraq, but never saw a need to call for any personal sacrifice to carry the debtload of hundreds of millions of dollars each day. Instead of calling for sacrifice, tax breaks have been legislated for the benefit of the richest. Through our need to borrow, our own economy has come to depend on the kindness of communist nations like China to pay for our elective wars which we claim will "make the world safe for democracy." Meanwhile, the gap between rich and poor has widened. Poverty in America is on the rise while the Bush economy grows, taking on third-world characteristics. We see a staggering amount of concentrated wealth that recalls to us the memory of the pre-Depression days. Hurricane Katrina literally blew the lid off the issue of poverty and washed away the illusion that we didn't know that the problem of poverty existed. The truth is, we didn't act because we didn't want to look, as Sen John Edwards eloquently said today in his Center for American Progress speech on "Restoring the American Dream." The $3.oo per gallon we pay at the pump for our gas is a personal sacrifice - but only for the oil companies.

I want to know what happened to the America where caring citizens shared common traditional values and worked for the common good? Just about any issue you examine today leaves you with a sense that you're living as an island - in a vacuum where everything your leadership is telling you they're doing raises a distinct sense of hypocrisy when you look at the actual outcome of their actions.

Americans thirst for community - and they're becoming increasingly tired of the kind of political hypocrisy where one thing comes out of the President's lips, and another thing happens altogether.

Peter Daou: The Triangle

Peter Daou: The Triangle
Limits of Blog Power
Peter Daou of the Daou Report[Salon.com]has written a piece on blogging and its political power and the limits of that power. As a Kerry advisor, he says he'd made his case as forcefully as he could on behalf of netroots organizing as a communications tour de force, but to a good extent, "the old guard" made it clear that it was too early in American political history for convincing them.

By defining "political influence" as the capacity to alter or create conventional wisdom, (conventional wisdom meaning a widely held belief on which most people act), Daou uses Hurricane Katrina and Ohio candidate-for-Congress Paul Hackett as prime examples of how a triangle of blogs, media, and the political establishment has been (and can be) an essential influence in creating a major shift of "conventional wisdom."

Daou offers his view of the confluence of the triangle construct (netroots + media + party establishment = Conventional Wisdom), and forwards the notion that, although media would get along just fine without bloggers - having a megaphone large enough to keep their corner as the gatekeepers of Conventional Wisdom - the bloggers' presence has thrown an undeniable monkey wrench in the spokes of their wheels.

From whence doth netroots power cometh? I'll use Peter Daou's words:

Reporters, pundits, and politicians read blogs, and, more importantly, they care what bloggers say about them because they know other reporters, pundits, and politicians are reading the same blogs. It’s a virtuous circle for the netroots and a source of political power.

I found agreement with Daou's view of the right blogosphere in that their primary strategic aim seems to be preventing the left from forming its own triangle, as they have done with Drudge-Fox News and the RNC (top-down strategy). Desperation shows when an unvarnished truth (such as that exposed by Katrina) appears, rendering their "conventional wisdom" as little more than a smoke screen - a "triangle-emperor with no clothing."

As far as the left is concerned, Daou says :

...left-leaning bloggers face the challenge of a mass media consumed by the shop-worn narrative of Bush the popular, plain-spoken leader, and a Democratic Party incapacitated (for the most part) by the focus-grouped fear of turning off "swing voters" by attacking Bush. For the progressive netroots, the past half-decade has been a Sisyphean loop of scandal after scandal melting away as the media and party establishment remain disengaged.

and he offers some advice:

It would seem reasonable to conclude, then, that the best strategy for the progressive netroots is to go after the media and Democratic Party leaders and spend less time and energy attacking the Bush administration. If the netroots alone can’t change the political landscape without the participation of the media and Democratic establishment, then there’s no point wasting precious online space blasting away at Republicans while the other sides of the triangle stand idly by.

If I were to throw in any additional advice, it would be for left-bloggers to continue to contribute and forward constructive ideas about respective issues, because someone is definitely listening and may be interested or influenced by those ideas.

When Karl Rove Speaks

When Karl Rove Speaks...

...people listen to (and tell about) what the influential gasbag is saying.

Middle Class Taxpayers Will Lose American Dream

Paying for Katrina:
Middle Class Taxpayers Will Lose American Dream

On Katrina rebuilding:

"It's going to cost whatever it costs," [President] Bush said [last Friday.] Allan Hubbard, Bush's economic adviser, was equally blunt when asked who will pay: "The money ... is going to come from the federal taxpayer." [USA Today]

Do the math, whiz kids. Unless Bush tax cuts are rolled back now, you middle-class taxpayers are going to bear the brunt of this thing - and so will your children. Bush says he's confident that "we" can handle it - meaning you, the taxpayer. Are you so sure? Tom Delay admits there's no more federal spending to cut. "No appreciable fat", he says, as if he's talking about Kate Moss instead of your government.

This is where the rubber meets the road - and Karl Rove is drunk with power at the wheel. I can see us going off the road, Middle Class taxpayers, and what will be derailed, by the undue burden put upon you, is your American dream.

Call for Bush tax rollbacks now - before it's too late. Demand a realistic and transparent plan to rebuild New Orleans and end the poverty that pervaded the city before the Hurrican ever came close.

John Edwards to Give Speech on Poverty

John Edwards to Give Speech on Poverty

Today at 1:15 pm ET at the Center for American Progress, Sen. John Edwards will discuss the structural poverty that was exposed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and how the country needs to seize this opportunity to take the steps necessary to fight poverty and expand opportunities for everyone in our country. For more information, click here. [from-OneAmerica]

Watch the One America website for my summary of and thoughts on John Edwards' speech.

CYA on WMD Tied Military's Hands in Iraq

CYA on WMD Tied Military's
Hands in Iraq

"I was in meetings where (General John) Abizaid was pounding on the table trying to get some help," says a senior military officer.

This is just one of the sad and shocking facts revealed in the most recent Time magazine [The Secret History of How the U.S. Misjudged the Enemy in Iraq], showing that the Bush administration was trying so hard to cover their asses on WMD that our military was barred from obtaining important intelligence to help them fight the insurgency because it wasn't "the priority."

I'm furious - and if you're not, then you are not paying attention.

Iraq's missing $1billion

Iraq's missing $1billion
One of the largest thefts in history

One billion dollars has been plundered from Iraq's defence ministry in one of the largest thefts in history, The Independent can reveal, leaving the country's army to fight a savage insurgency with museum-piece weapons. [Independent]

Quote of the Day: Frank Rich

Quote of the Day: Frank Rich

"What comes next? Having turned the page on Mr. Bush, the country hungers for a vision that is something other than either liberal boilerplate or Rovian stagecraft. At this point, merely plain old competence, integrity and heart might do."

- Frank Rich [NYT]