It's time that we fought back preemptively at the slime machine heading down its way towards Obama . (See Glenn Greenwald for the dirt ).  The extremity of attacks is breathtaking, but right now it's relatively confined, but it's a typical example of the Overton Window -the more extreme the attack, and the more it's propagated, the more something must be true.

So with that in mind, I'd like to point out some of the issues with John McCain that you might not know...that might help next time you meet a righty blathering about Obama's "Marxist" ties... (most of which is as distorted as the crap about Obama...we're not talkin' about the true stuff here.)

This diary originally began as a comment in RenaRF's diary on believing in Obama.  It got me thinking about why I'm supporting Edwards over Obama right now, when I had been leaning Obama in the beginning of 2007.  (Actually, when Edwards declared his candidacy down in New Orleans, I thought, "oh crap, he's gonna split the anti-Hillary vote" with Obama.)

I'm going to try to flesh out some thoughts of my concerns about Obama.  This isn't to say Edwards is perfect.  My concerns that Obama's presidency will leave us disappointed may be applied to an Edwards presidency too.  But like aigenta said and BenGoshi echoed yesterday, if we are to lose a battle, I want to make sure we go down fighting.

Some fleshed out thoughts below the fold....

Vermont Public Radio ran a short interview with freshman Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders this morning (transcript  here, audio is also available), and I finally heard an elected official say, essentially, ENOUGH.

Bernie will work against any measure regarding Iraq that does NOT include a firm timetable for withdrawal. VPR also reports Senator Patrick Leahy will have a "difficult time" supporting any such capitulation.

    Essentially, any 'compromise legislation' is a non-starter with the Vermont senatorial delegation. Reid's fear of a threatened filibuster has pushed him, effectively, into the Republican party. In an attempt to pander to their bloodlust and inability to admit wrong, he has adopted a strategy that forces members of his caucus into a new opposition.
And that is what capitulation from a position of strength gets you.

As progressives, we want to shift political discourse in our favor.  Hopefully this diary will help clarify why we may not want to use the Overton Window to do it.  Knowing our values and presenting ourselves with authenticity is the key!

Yesterday I posted a diary about the limitations of thinking about politics in terms of left and right.  Today I would like to talk about the problems with a strategy called the Overton Window.

More below the fold...

This diary is cross-posted at Rockridge Nation.

This is the first of a three part series, to be published over the next few days.  Part 2 dissects the metaphors behind traditional political strategies based on the political spectrum of left-right politics - including a detailed discussion of the Overton Window.  Part 3 presents the real strategy used by conservatives to shift debate in their favor and offers guidance for progressives to turn the tide.

Conservative strategists have successfully shifted political discourse in their favor. Progressives can shift the debate back by understanding how the political mind works. In order to do so, however, it is necessary to move beyond the faulty idea that there is a horizontal political spectrum from left to center to right.

More below the fold...

This article is cross-posted on Rockridge Nation.

Notwithstanding my diary from January titled In defense of censure, the political and actual climate (not just on a global warming level) have changed substantially.  Back then, I argued that censure would be a good first step to shift the Overton Window on impeachment and get the public used to hearing the term being used in a more "mainstream" kind of way.

Well, guess what?  That has already happened without a call for censure or a censure resolution.  Impeachment talk, whether it is about Bush, Cheney or Gonzales (who I am the most in favor of impeaching rightfuckingnow for a myriad of reasons), has been in public discourse for months.  And not just among the "crazylibrulleftwingradicaltroophatingterroristlovingbabykillers" either.

Never one to miss out on the big fights, let me revisit today one of my most commented upon diaries: Is DailyKos a rightwing site?.

But instead of jumping right in with provocative statements, let me try instead to try to bring about some definitions.

As others may have noticed, "leftists", after having been used to label any non Al-Qaeda "extremist", whether shadowy sabotageurs in Mexico, Michael Moore, Hugo Chavez or US opponents to the war in Afghanistan, is now casually and regularly used to describe any opposition party the conventional wisdom dislikes (see for instance in Mexico or in France).

It's time to talk about War Crimes Prosecutions. It's time to ask Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid about War Crimes Prosecutions. Of course, Harry and Nancy being, well, Harry and Nancy, they're certain to tell us that War Crimes Prosecutions against Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Libby, Addington, Yoo, Bybee, Gonzalez, and a host of other Administration luminaries are....OFF THE TABLE.

But they would be willing to support a Congressional Investigation....

So what laws might have been violated?

Friends, we need a reality check.  Or perhaps better put:  a "reality" check.

It seems like many discussions at Daily Kos these days eventually reach a point where one commentor asserts that another is not part of the "reality-based" community, or some variation on that theme:  i.e., "I'm a realist."  Meaning, of course: you are NOT a realist.

I don't want to start a fight.  Truly.  Though I do love a good fight, it's my hope that in this diary we can cordially work out our ideas on the whole topic of, well, Reality.

(si, hay mas...)

An absolutely incredible article was published by the Financial Times this morning. It is written by the current President of the Czech Republic, hard core Thatcherite Vaclav Klaus (not to be mistaken with former dissident and writer Vaclav Havel, whom he replaced at the presidency)

Freedom, not climate, is at risk by Vaclav Klaus

As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism. This ideology wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central (now global) planning.

The new Joint Chiefs nominee, Mike Mullen, has declared that "we are in a generational war".

Yes, we of the middle class are in a generational war all right–-against the industrial cartels.

In a lead editorial, yesterday, the fourth most widely circulated newspaper in the United States unequivocably called for an end to Bush's Iraq War:

Having invested so much in Iraq, Americans are likely to find disengagement almost as painful as war. But the longer we delay planning for the inevitable, the worse the outcome is likely to be. The time has come to leave.

Why do Kossacks hate Dennis Kucinich so much?

I know I'm coming off as a real heavy DK supporter here. I'm not. I've been telling virtually everyone I know that I'm maintaining my undecided status intentionally, and I'm waiting until next year before I make up my mind.

But it pains me every time that someone gives a yawn, or an insult, or even the "why bother, he'll never get elected" line whenever Dennis' name is mentioned on these pages.

We're Democrats here. We're supposed to support the process that allows even the little guy (yeah yeah, not a short joke) a chance to get up and let his voice be heard. We're also mostly Progressive folks here on DailyKos. Join me on the other side and let's talk about this some more, shall we?

Okay, I'll admit it.  I'm what is known by the right wing in my church as a cafeteria Catholic.  What that means to me is that I don't swallow hook, line, and sinker every pronouncement or opinion just because it comes from Rome.  To the right wing it means I'm not a "real" Catholic and should be driven out of the Church.  I know I'm not alone in this.  The very fact that there is a term for cafeteria Catholic proves that.  I figured here on dKos would be a great place to find like-minded progressive Catholics.  

Part of the problem is that the ultraconservative portion of the church is framing this debate and putting those of us who believe that Jesus's message was primarily one of forgiveness on the defensive.  

Follow me over the flip for some ideas on how to use framing in the debate within the church.  

Sheesh, all this talk by the folks runnin' fer President on the Democratic ticket about if, when, we gonna leave as to the number of human sacrifices troops they would forget/dispatch to/in The MeatGrinder. I understand they were responding to questions at MoveOn.org but this makes the my argument all the more important as it is clear that the citizens of our nation are confused about what's going on in Iraq and how the next President might extricate us from the quagmire Mr. Bush has sunk us into so effectively.

The Bushists have deliberately placed the Overton Windowin the wrong wall of the house that Cheney built on a foundation of lies and illegality. Bush and Cheney would have the public believe that withdrawal of U.S. troops from The MeatGrinder is unthinkable. Democrats, the candidates included, have realized with the help of the citizenry applying some boot to their beltway butts have reached the point in the Overton Window process where withdrawal of the majority, if not all, troops is acceptable. Follow me to see where we want to put that window to give us a view of a future without Bush the Republican Party or The MeatGrinder.

A great comment by Disputo over at Kevin Drum's blog (in a discussion about the fact that supply-side economics are officially junk) linked together a number of issues I've written about in a single argument:

Taking the supply side approach to any problem has been thoroughly debunked by reality

Beyond the economy, he mentions immigration, terrorism, and energy as topics where the solutions might be found on the demand side, but are exclusively sought by our politicians on the supply side - and sold to the public.

From the European Tribune

My SciBlings (a nickname for bloggers on Seed Magazine's scienceblogs.com) Chris Mooney (the author of "The Republican War on Science") and Matt Nisbet just published an article in 'Science' (which, considering its topic is, ironically, behind the subscription wall, but you can check the short press release) about "Framing Science"

This is not a simple topic, but I will try to organize my thoughts in some way....

Iowa Boy's interesting diary about the freepers and how they are alienating all but the most die hard conservatives and/or religious fundamentalists got me thinking.

A big part of his diary was how he felt more at ease with the Democrats than with what remains of the Republican party, and how that could lead to massive victories for the Democratic party.

But if the Democratic party gains the influx of what can only be described as "sane conservatives", what will happen to it? How will these people, that should be in the Republican party, had it not been hijacked by its extremists, influence the Democratic party? If the Democrats stand for sanity against the clear and present danger of the Bush administration, an overwhelming victory is indeed needed, but what will it mean?

If what can at best be described as a centrist coalition of the left and the sane right wins against the extreme right. where does it govern next? On the left? Or with the ideas of the sane right, i.e. Republican ideas?