Daily Kos

Markos and Warner are Getting a Little Cozy

Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 04:55:16 PM PDT

I'll admit that the Yearly Kos convention-goers make an easy target for ridicule.  We're old, we dress kind of funny, we're a little geeky about computers, and political junkies of any persuasion are always a bit odd.  Back in September 2005 a lot of the more traditional and cantankerous bloggsters went down to Washington DC to protest the war in Iraq.  Some of the kewl kids thought we were wasting our time.  But, those of us that went knew that what we were doing was important and empowering.  A large part of the sense of empowerment that we shared in DC was not related to how many feet we put on the Mall, but about meeting our online friends in real life, and seeing a digital reality because manifest in the real world.  Electron broadband blasts became real action in real time.

Yearly Kos has that same feel.  Thousands of people are meeting all over this city and greeting each with their user names, discussing each other's diaries, and the diaries of their favorite writers.  And, it is all in a context where our votes are being courted by the Democratic leadership and presidential aspirants.

It's heady stuff, and it's hard to get my mind around how fast the Daily Kos community went from a place where we pissed and moaned to a place that has this kind of pull.  On one level, it's great.  Even for the people that have been alienated from the Daily Kos community during its rise to prominence and power, this should be seen as positive development.  But, all is not well in Kossackistan.  I may be the first to bring this up, but it certainly would have been brought up without me being the one to say it.  Especially after Mark Warner's keynote speech.

Markos introduced Mark Warner.  And when he did so, he has very clear that he has not endorsed Warner for President in 2008.  He also was clear that his friend Jerome Armstrong very much wants him to endorse Warner.  And he was clear that he is impressed and pleased with Warner because he was the first major politician to agree to come to Yearly Kos, that by doing so he had lent credibility to the conference and led many other politicians to attend, and that Warner has shown a willingness to engage the netroots movement.  Those are the facts.  And I share those sentiments with Markos.  Warner is coming after our votes and he is being very aggressive about it.  That is not a bad thing.  

But there can be no avoiding a controversy about the close relationship that is developing between Warner and Daily Kos.  Warner was not only granted the keynote speech; prior to the speech he was allowed to pass out free Yearly Kos t-shirts with his face (not Markos's or Wesley Clark's, or FDR's, or Russ Feingold's, or Hillary Clinton's, or Armando's) superimposed on the front.  And on the back, it says 'Forward Together' and 'Authorized and Paid for by Forward Together PAC.'   That is Mark Warner's presidential political action committee.  Then we were all subjected to a Kennedyesque five-minute canned campaign infomercial.  Then Warner gave a well presented and well received speech, emphasizing a Dukakis-like technocratic competency that was striking (if one hadn't been expecting it) for its lack of ideology.

All of this came on the heels of Warner's huge blowout part last night at the Stratosphere (an event that was in no way affiliated with Yearly Kos).  The party was lavish, providing cocktails, a sushi bar, and carved meats and cheese trays.  

Even before the Keynote address I was hearing a lot of grumbling about Warner's decision to spend so much money buttering up the Kossack crowd.  After the t-shirt and informercial stunts, I heard a lot more grumbling.

For some, the problem is a simple matter of how Warner is choosing to spend his money.  But for others, the problem is that Mark Warner is a centrist candidate that has strong connections to the Democratic Leadership Council.  And it is jarring to see Markos go from declaring war on the DLC to coming within inches of endorsing a DLC candidate for President over two years out from the election.  

Let's be clear about one thing.  Markos did not endorse Warner.  He was explicit about that.  But he has given Warner a major platform to try to win over the Kossack community and to raise his profile from a little known Governor, to someone that might give (another DLC candidate) Hillary Clinton a run for her money.

And the question then becomes, "is this what Daily Kos wants?  Has Daily Kos come to a point where they are going to cozy up to the Democratic Leadership Council?'  Why are we so opposed to Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman, if not because they supported the war and do not advocate leaving Iraq?  How is Mark Warner any different in this regard?"

I've sat down with Governor Warner and discussed Iraq with him.  I like Governor Warner and I know that he is torn over what to do in Iraq.  I appreciate, really appreciate, his attitude towards the netroots, toward the progressive community, and toward me personally.  I think he is a good man, and I think he should be taken seriously as a candidate.  Not all DLC members are the same.  There is a big difference between Lieberman, Bayh, and Hillary on the one hand and Warner, Richardson, and Vilsack on the other.  Gore is a DLC candidate cut from another mold.  

The way the Presidential race is shaping up, it looks like John Edwards and Russ Feingold are going to be the only non-DLC candidates with a prayer of winning.  So, looking at Mark Warner makes some sense.  At least he is listening, being respectful, and has shown us good-will.  Hillary is busy in New York City this weekend.

So, I'm not bashing Mark Warner.  I'm not questioning Markos's gratefulness to Warner, or his decision to give Warner the keynote spot.  But, I don't think the Kossack community is ready to give up the fight for a more progressive candidate and more progressive politics a full two years before the election.  And we are going to see a battle royale between those that think Russ Feingold or John Edwards are the proper candidates to carry the orange banner and those that are won over by coconut shrimp, and free kosmopolitans and t-shirts.      

Tags: Mark Warner, Markos Moulitsas, Daily Kos, YearlyKos 2006, meta, DLC, Jerome Armstrong, Forward Together, Stratosphere (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 529 comments

    •  I hope (46+ / 0-)

      everyone is going to decide for themselves who they feel most resonates for them on the basis of their values and on information.

      I'm 100% for Feingold so far as well and if Markos supports Warner, well, that's up to him...I don't find Warner to be the best choice.

      Daily Kos needs to be a site for progressives to have a discussion, and from what I can tell so far, Markos has tried to avoid taking on a guru role. I hope Kossacks can choose not to give him such a role also.

      McCain insisted [no union member] would [pick lettuce for $50/hour] for a complete season. "You can't do it, my friends."

      by grrr on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 04:58:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Feingold, also, but Wes Clark sure isn't afraid (44+ / 0-)

      to stand up on a bar stool and start rabble rousing.  Plus, he was quite dandy in coodinating his tie with Fabooj's top.  That shows some forward thinking.

      We don't have time for short-term thinking.

      by Compound F on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 05:06:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Clark, Edwards, Feingold, Obama. (10+ / 0-)

        Warner's okay.  I don't think we can lose by supporting any of these candidates.

        -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

        by sunbro on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 05:17:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Obama isn't running (7+ / 0-)

          but I think your point still stands.  We're going to have plenty of great candidates to choose from.  If Gore joins in, it'll be even better.

          I'm not really a fan of Warner's, but I love that he's actually engaging the community.  You could be cynical and just say he's trying to buy us off, but even if that's true, it's better than nothing, which is what we're getting from Hillary and Lieberman.

          •  Richardson, Warner, Gore. (3+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            LarryInNYC, DigDug, DKHOLLA

            No senators. Please. They don't win.

          •  You apparently don't (3+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            Del C, nprigo, blueoasis

            communicate with Obama that much.  Every time I have, he acts just like all the other sniveling democrats in  the House and the Senate.

            Don't attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

            by jasfm on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 08:28:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Obama has done NOTHING (0+ / 0-)

              to deserve being considered as a presidential candidate.  

              As far as I can tell, he's another Hillary Clinton-style triangulator -- the last thing on earth this country needs.

              JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

              by asskicking annie on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 09:19:46 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Looking through your history (4+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                Joe B, ChiGirl88, Sam I Am, sunbro
                It seems like all you do is criticize Democrats and talk about how we're going to lose.  
                Have you even bothered to look at Obama's voting record?  What exactly bothers you about him?  Which Democrats do you like?
                •  Hey Matt; Obama's voting--Strengths,Weaknesses? (0+ / 0-)

                  What do you figure the pros and cons are here?

                  I remember a time when there was a huge buzz regarding Obama's future.  

                  What do his supporters say?  I guess we've heard some of the naysayers' points above.

                  -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

                  by sunbro on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 09:37:41 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Here's what I usually say (4+ / 0-)

                    Recommended by:
                    ademption, ChiGirl88, Sam I Am, sunbro
                    As far as his voting record, it's been nearly flawless.  He's been on the right side of almost every issue.  Take a look here at his speech on October 26, 2002 regarding the Iraq War.  I don't think a better speech has been given on that subject, even to this day.  The ADA  has given him a perfect rating and Progressive Punch has him down as our 6th most progressive Senator.  The only real criticism I've heard has to do with his confirmation votes, but he's following the same standards that Senator Feingold follows.  They both think the President is generally entitled to pick who he wants to work for him as long as they are technically qualified. For some reason, only Senator Obama gets criticized for this.  

                    As far as him being cautious, that's because he's still just a first-term Senator who's trying to find his way without making enemies.  He's gotten criticism for defending Lieberman and Leahy, but that's what Senate colleagues are expected to do for each other.  Some people here mistook that for his approval of their positions when that certainly wasn't the case.

                    What he's focused on is serving his constituents in Illinois and he's done an excellent job of it.  He's followed Feingold's model of holding frequent town halls to discuss his constituent's concerns.    He's consistently had a 70% approval rating, the highest of any Democratic Senator in the country.  Despite his progressive views and voting record, he's able to get the support of Republicans because of his ability to communicate and persuade.  He graduated magna cum laude at Harvard Law and was the President of the Review there.

                    Anyway, I could go on and on, but I've already written a novel so I'll stop there.  I try to aggressively respond to criticism of him because I know he's a favorite target of Republican trolls. They know what he's capable of and it scares them.

                    •  Wow! That was excellent, Matt. (1+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      lost my password

                      You've convinced me.  Now I like Barack Obama even more than I did when I wrote my first post this evening mentioning him as a possible Presidential contender.

                      Obama's political consultants ought to hire you.  You write well and you could function as a valuable advocate if he should decide to change his mind about getting into the race for the White House now.

                      -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

                      by sunbro on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 01:22:24 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Thanks (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        sunbro
                        I don't think he'll change his mind though.  Entering too early would allow his opponents to attack his lack of experience, whereas if he waited and got some experience, he would be almost impossible to attack.  He might accept the VP slot if the matchup is right, but otherwise I think he'll hold out until the next opportunity.  He's still very young, so he shouldn't rush into it.
                    •  haw about Alito? Hayden? (0+ / 0-)

                      flawless?

                      Obama was on the wrong side of the most important confirmations weve had.

                      Only thing Obama did was give a good speech at the convention.

                      •  FTR, Obama voted to sustain the (0+ / 0-)

                        filibuster against Alito as well as voting against his confirmation.

                        I am note familiar with Hayden.

                        In John McCain we have the opportunity to experience Bush's Third Term.

                        by Sam I Am on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:33:34 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  everybody will be on the wrong side (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        lost my password

                        of something....your mission (if you decide to take it)will be to find the person who is on the LEAST wrong sides of the issues you hold dear to your hearts.

                        this post will self destruct in 45 seconds.

                        The CONSTITUTION is MY Flag pin

                        by KnotIookin on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 08:21:33 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Alito was a litmus test in my book (0+ / 0-)

                          I dont want ideologically perfect politicians, just a real opposition party.

                          •  I explained his rationale on confirmation votes (0+ / 0-)

                            and as Sam I Am noted above, he voted against cloture on Alito, so I'm not sure what you're complaining about.  Now we're going to judge a person's voting record based on how reluctantly we think they made that vote?  I'd ask you the same question I asked "asskicking annie", which Democrats do you like?  If you're going to hold everyone to such a high standard, I can't imagine you being satisfied with anyone.
                    •  What I need is (0+ / 0-)

                      a Democrat who will stand up and grab a ball if he has one and fight for me a lowly American citizen.  Someone who is not scared of annoying the re-thugs running this country into the ground.  
                       I wrote to Obama about net neutrality and all I got was a well, maybe.  Well, I don't need a maybe and I don't need to be spied on.  And this is MY Senator, I voted for him, I applauded his speech at the convention, and I was proud that we elected the right person, but he needs to stand up and be counted before being considered as a presidential candidate.
                       He didn't just defend Lieberman, he endorsed him, what's up with that?

                      Don't attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

                      by jasfm on Tue Jun 13, 2006 at 08:26:14 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:42:47 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:06 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:12 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:18 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:20 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:24 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:26 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:27 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:28 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Reply (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  supersoling

                  Better late than never -- just got back from a daylong trip.

                  In answer to your question, I was tremendously offended by Obama's milquetoast and grudging support of the Alito filibuster, and his implication that he thought it was somehow wrong to oppose the Republicans on basically anything.

                  As for which Democrats I like, there really aren't any, and the last three paragraphs of this Glenn Greenwald post -- http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/... -- explain why.  In short, we need the Democrats to act as an opposition party, and none of them are doing anything that meaningfully opposes the criminal administration currently in power.  They are no better than the "good Germans" of the WW2 era.

                  JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                  by asskicking annie on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 07:43:29 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  wow, a decuple post (0+ / 0-)

                    haven't seen that before.  Anyway, thanks for the reply.
                    As far as the Alito thing, I think he was misunderstood on that.  He was prepared to do whatever it took to prevent Alito from being confirmed.  The problem was that it was clear they just didn't have the numbers, so he was frustrated and said some things about how we have to do better in the future in order to prevent it from even getting to that point.  If you look back at his exact words, you'll see he definitely wasn't saying it was wrong to oppose the Republicans. He was just saying that we needed to be better at it. Unfortunately, his words were twisted by the media in the headlines, so that's probably what you and others saw.
                    As far as the Democrats in general, they just don't have the power to do anything meaningful. That was illustrated in the Alito confirmation and that's part of what Obama was talking about.  We need to do 2 things: 1)Elect more good Democrats like Obama, and 2)Replace bad Democrats like Lieberman.  If we had 51 Barack Obamas in the Senate, Alito would not have been confirmed.  
                    •  Democrats (1+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      supersoling

                      I have no idea why my post appeared multiple times, although I've seen a few other examples of this happening elsewhere in the Diaries.

                      There are a number of procedural moves, including the filibuster, the Democrats could use to block the more insidious Bush agenda items and nominees.  They do not use them, even when a horrid nominee like Alito comes up for confirmation.  Their weak and craven cave-ins even on such egregious nominees encourages the Republicans to nominate ever more radical judges and cabinet and department leaders (Alito, Hayden).

                      The Hayden vote is extremely troubling to me because it demonstrates that the Democrats, even if they had a sizeable majority, would continue to meekly confirm radical Bush nominees without a struggle.

                      Since the prime mover for the Democrats seems to be their fear and their cowardice, the only way to get them to stand up to Bush is to make them equally as afraid of their own base.  That means standing up to them and letting them have it when they fuck up.  The Lamont candidacy, if successful, will be the first positive step in striking fear of the base in the yellow hearts of these Democrats.  This is why I think the Connecticut primary is the most important race of 2006.  If Lamont wins, a list needs to be drawn up of every fuck-up Democrat who stands for re-election in 2008, and a search for the best possible primary opponents should begin immediately.

                      JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                      by asskicking annie on Mon Jun 12, 2006 at 03:57:51 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I agree (0+ / 0-)

                        I just think it's important not to blame the good Democrats like Obama. They're doing what they can but they have just one vote.  You still need 40 votes to sustain a filibuster and we won't have that because guys like Lieberman would never sign on to a filibuster even if it was against the Devil.  We need to be picking on just the guys who haven't been doing their jobs.  Guys like Lieberman and Carper.  And we just need to get more Democrats elected.  
                        •  Getting Democrats elected (1+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          supersoling

                          Not just any Democrats.  I could give a lesser shit whether or not Casey wins in PA -- he's another DINO.  Likewise Claire McCaskill in MO -- the "but s/he's better than a Republican argument cuts no ice with me, and it's how we got where we are with all these unreliable, worthless, Bush-sucking Democrats.

                          We will have to fight the party leadership to unseat these worthless incumbents.  Even Barbara Boxer is on record as supporting Lieberman's re-election.  The blank-check support of incumbents on the part of the party leadership is a good reason to vote directly to candidates you support, rather than to the party itself.  Otherwise, your donations will be used to prop up Lieberman and other underperforming Democrats.  

                          Do I support only hardcore progressives?  No.  However, it IS true that I support only Democrats who oppose Bush.  Paul Hackett and Brian Schweitzer are not very progressive, yet both fearlessly call bullshit on this administration.

                          And frankly, if I lived in Nebraska, I would very possibly vote for Ben Nelson's Republican opponent just to strike a blow against one of the very worst Bush-enablers in the party.  It's true we could not elect a progressive in red Nebraska.  But we can do a damn sight better than the piece of shit who currently holds that seat.  I think a Schweitzer type candidate could do VERY well there -- it's just a shame we'll have to wait until 2012 to find out.  Likewise, we could do so much better in NY -- what the hell is wrong that we have two warhawk Bush lovers wasting those two seats?

                          JUST SAY NO TO HILLIEBERMAN!!! "The truth is there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there?" ---"V"---

                          by asskicking annie on Mon Jun 12, 2006 at 09:26:28 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I dunno, Annie... (0+ / 0-)

                            There are places in the country where I'd settle for a DINO.  e.g. Utah, where the GOP advantage in registration is what, 70-30?

                            The thing is, even a DINO contributes to handing leadership control to the Dem side, and, as we saw in the '90s, when the GOP used procedural blocks against Clinton's nominees, that matters.  If we'd held even a SLIM majority in the Senate, even with a few DINOs unwilling to directly block Bush's nominees, we could've still blocked them using the "blue slip" rule (where a Senator from a judge's home state can block them) and the anonymous hold rule.  With the GOP in the majority, they were able to simply "reinterpret" the procedures they used against Clinton for six years.

                            I do agree, overall, though, that in states where we clearly are winning (like CT), we should not settle for DINOs.  I hope Lieberman goes down in flames.

          •  Lieberman who?? (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            sunbro

            Oh, the guy who will be running as an indy, that guy?

            The trick is in what one emphasizes. We either make ourselves miserable, or we make ourselves happy. The amount of work is the same." Carlos Castaneda

            by FireCrow on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 09:39:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Wes Clark's Tie (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        David Boyle, goodasgold

        I noticed that too. I've never seen a lime green tie before!  

        I do not know what weapons World War III will be fought with. World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones. -- Albert Einstein

        by elveta on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 05:27:55 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  A year ago... (22+ / 0-)

      ...I was among those who mocked and ridiculed a 2nd run by Al Gore. I was a Clark guy. A major Clark guy. But after a hugely disappointing personal experience with Clark and his people, I am today one of Gore's strongest supporters.

      Why?

      Not because his progressive bona fides are better than Feingold's, or because of his name recognition or because everyone has now seen what could have been or because this study predicted that he would win the 2008 in a landslide while Hillary, et al, would lose.

      I want Al Gore to run because I feel he learned the most important lesson in politics more deeply and more profoundly than any of the other proposed candidates, and the lesson is this: At the end of the day, what you stand for is all you have.

      He allowed himself to be rounded off in 2000 by Donna Brazille and Bob Shrum. He stopped talking about the environment because they told him it was a loser issue. He took Holy Joe along for the ride. He played the middle of the road because that's what his people told him to do and it cost him. Huge.

      And out of that pain, something clicked inside Gore. He went back to who he was. He endorsed Howard Dean in 2004 when doing so was still risky. He spoke out on each new Bush travesty. He began pushing the most important issue in his life - the inconvenient truth of global warming - and people are listening.

      I want Gore because I don't believe he's capable of suppressing who he is any longer. And if you see his film, you'll be pretty impressed with who he is.

      Someone else will tell us if the same can be said for Markos' pick.

      Democrats: For the health, prosperity and security of every single American.

      by alysheba on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 06:12:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Vote for Warner or Gore (0+ / 0-)

        or your favorites for president and vice president here.

        Gore and Edwards are leading for president now, with the vice presidential poll under coordinated attack from some Clarkies, which is cool I guess.

        Alex
        Choose Our President 2008

      •  He was on Leno and was warm and funny (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        joynow, Brother Love

        and I'd hate to wish the Presidency on him but I agree, I think we need 'mature' Al Gore.

        Encourage your representative to sponsor a Support the Troops Act today.

        by altscott on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 07:13:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Hi Alysheba (5+ / 0-)

        welcome to the club.  We aren't exclusive, we don't even know if he will run.  But we sure hope that something convinces him to do so.

        As for booman's calling Gore a DLC candidate.  I think booman should realize that Gore left the DLC behind long ago.  If endorsing Dean wasn't the final nail in that coffin I don't know what is.  Besides it was key people in the DLC who made it clear to Gore that he would not be welcome as the nominee in 2004.  They still had that kind of power then.  

        I don't think they do anymore and I hope Gore runs and they DLC crowd goes to the garden to eat worms.

      •  I agree (1+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        nprigo

        Gore for me.  He can win this one... well, he won the other one but.

        •  Al Gore is not going to run. (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          ChiGirl88
          He essentially said so on Leno the other night. He did seem to leave the door open a wee little (dont they all), but I think thats just to keep people interested in his movie - he wants to make sure the message gets out. Once his movie ends its run he'll state categorically he's not running for Pres.
      •  Absolutely agree with you about Al Gore, but (0+ / 0-)

        Everything you say about him is true IMHO.  He found his real self, endorsed Dean, and started speaking out dinging BushCo whenever he could like his speeches that Moveon sponsored (best speeches he ever gave!).  And then he decided to turn his undivided attention to global warming, indeed it has become his true passion and IMHO his true calling.

        While I'll lead the cheerleading squad for a Gore/Feingold ticket, I think I've come to believe that we need Gore doing what he's doing - waking up the world and making it realize we have to do something now about global warming.  His movie showed he understands very well that our country, at least, doesn't have what is required to take action until we find our political will again.  Indeed, he says just that at the end.  To me, it the most moving part of the movie.  He was so clearly discouraged that there seemed to be no political will left in our country - that our government had done pretty much everything within its power (which they claim is unlimited!) to zap us of any political will to do much of anything.  It was clear, at least to me, that he perceives this as a dire threat and laments that we ever got to where we are and how easy it would be to rectify and/or prevent at least some of the damage caused by global warming.  

        And that is why, after seeing that movie, I think Gore should keep on doing what he's doing.  Now, if he should by some miracle agree to run, I'll be the first on a jet plane to Anywhere USA doing whatever I can to get him elected, along with Feingold, of course!  

        We Need REGIME CHANGE  

    •  Yeah, what smintheus said n/t (0+ / 0-)

      We Need REGIME CHANGE

    •  I don't see what the issue is. (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Danny Boy, Newsie8200, Donna in Rome

      Kossacks organized a convention, and invited Warner to speak.  Markos didn't organize the convention, so logic tells me he didn't extend the invitation either; the convention organizers did.  Warner showed up - all the way out in Vegas, so this surely involved some planning and effort - and gave a speech, and gave out some T-shirts, which normally one would take as a goodwill gesture and try to appreciate, but maybe the blogosphere is just Bizarro World.  

      What exactly is the problem?  This is politics!  One would assume a politician meeting a potentially important group of supporters might, you know, act like a politician!

      The word "DLC" is used around here like the right uses "liberal."   That's not a way to have an intelligent conversation.

      No matter what there are going to be lots of arguments around here over the primary candidates.

      You should really give people more credit than thinking they'd be won over by free t-shirts and cocktails.  Especially when you pointed out just a few paragraphs earlier that you heard a lot of grumbling about them.

      •  Of course (0+ / 0-)

        Sounds like it was a hell of a nice party.  Now I sort of wish I'd gone.  Maybe it made people more skeptical and they wouldn't have grumbled as much if it were just pizza and cheap beer?  But really, I'd be flattered if a candidate was inviting me to a swanky event with top shelf booze and everything.  I think something in the DC water supply is getting to me.  (beware.)

    •  Let's call things by their real name (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      blogswarm

      The danger posed at Yearly Kos is cooptation.

      From Desperately Seeking Selznick: Cooptation and the Dark Side of Public Management in Networks, an interesting paper by Laurance O'Toole at University of Georgia. I deliberately chose a scholarly paper from the world of academic public policy so that I wouldn't appear partisan or overly political.

      In this article, we argue that this inadvertently depoliticized analysis of networks and the network theme has resulted in a neglect of issues that should be considered as a part of the research agenda. We outline ways that networks and  network management point toward significant political issues. We then focus in particular on one political dimension of networks and their performance: the likelihood that, rather than being neutral producers of collective goods while enmeshed in a broader environment, network managers respond to the stronger and more politically powerful elements of their surroundings, thus magnifying tendencies toward inequalities present already in the social setting. This dynamic, what we call the “dark side” of managing networks, has been largely unexplored by network researchers. Such patterns, however, should not be unexpected.

      War is the statesman's game, the priest's delight, The lawyer's jest, the hired assassin's trade Invictus

      by Valtin on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 10:23:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sushi and Thrill Rides... (0+ / 0-)

        it's the updated version of panem et circenses (bread and circuses)...wouldn't it have been ironic if Warner had held his soiree at Caesars...they have some nice terraces reserved for this sort of activity.

        Maybe next year...

        People in Eurasia on the brink of oppression: I hope it's gonna be alright... Pet Shop Boys: Introspective

        by rgilly on Sun Jun 11, 2006 at 12:34:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  So long as Markos is not (8+ / 0-)

    seen wearing a semen stained shirt he's okay with me.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro" - Hunter S. Thompson (RIP)

    by redfish on Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 04:48:48 PM PDT

  •  Hillary's much more liberal than Warner, (18+ / 0-)

    so I don't see why you're putting her in the same category as Lieberman and Bayh.