Progressive Movement

And who is too blame? I am sure you have heard all the pontifications by now. And I am sure you all have your theories as to what the ramifications are of this assassination. Suffice it to say, it is not good for a moderate, democratic Pakistan, something I think we all should desire.

As always, I was interested in political responses. Bush was measured and quick not to condemn Mussarraf. The Republican presidential contenders all jumped on the “see, we need Republicans to win the war on terror!” bandwagon. That is, they took the opening presented and made it about how Islamo-fascism is alive and well and needs to be destroyed, preferably with military power. They used the opportunity to tell the voters America needs a strong, unwavering hand like Bush’s to fight terror.

Typical, but repetition is key to establishing your brand, and Republicans have the strong on defense brand in spades.

The Democrats ultimately gave better answers, but they were measured and thought out. This projects a different image, and one the public may want come November, but it is an image that does not speak to those feel threatened by dark skinned men in turbans. The thoughtful patrician image, think John Kerry, does not inspire confidence in times of crisis, when people want action, not talk.

So when Chris Dodd on Olbermann’s Countdown speaks of postponing the Pakistani elections so everyone can get a handle on what is going on, he plays into the concept that liberals are high-minded but do not know how to take action or defend the nation.

Richardson, whom Dodd attacked, took the forceful line, calling for Musharraf’s ouster. Now that projects power and forceful action - an unwavering committment to ideals. May not be the right answer, but from a messaging standpoint it is better. Always leave the policy debates and trade-offs in the backroom. When in front of the camera, strong, clear positions win the day.

And what is with no leading Democrat taking the opportunity to turn this debacle in Pakistan against the Republicans? Bush’s refusal to support moderate forces in Pakistan, instead sticking with the incredibly unpopular dictator Musharraf, helped lead Pakistan into political upheaval. Musharraf refuses to crack down on Al Qaeda and radical Islamic forces. Bush propped this tyrant up, and as a result Pakistan is a haven for extremism. The focus on tough guy talk against terrorism came at the cost of pushing Pakistan towards moderation.

Bush could have strong armed Musharraf to step down, hold elections, build Pakistani democracy, alleviate poverty, or other such things, but instead he supported Musharraf due to his tough guy image. As a result Pakistan is haven for radicals. Essentially, Bush talks about fighting terror, but when it all comes down to it, he is nothing but talk.

Ironically, right now the Democrats look like they are the ones who are all talk and no action (minus Richardson), and the Republicans do not, even though their king, Dick Cheney and the puppet G. W. Bush, have majorly screwed up the fight against terror.

Someone should have simply said this: (more…)

Messaging, Republicans, Dodd, weak on defense label, Olbermann, Foreign Policy, Musharraf | No Comments »

Saw Gov. Huckabee and Romney on the Sunday talk shows this week. Romney on MTP and Huckabee on LE on CNN. Wow, Russert really put Romney on the spot, and Romney showed himself to be utterly transparent. The guy lies through his teeth, and while he technically handled himself well, his fluency in dodging questions actually exposed his glibness.

Huckabee, on the other hand, also faced tough questions and dealt with them in a much more convincing and honest manner. This is a guy who comes across as not afraid to say, ‘yeah, I pardoned some criminals, but my motivations were pure and the action justified at the time, although in hindsight it did not turn out too well’. He did not seem to hide from his record or his reasons for those actions, and he seemed to be well beyond the attempts to drag him into scandal. And his answers did not seem overly rehearsed.

While polish is good when answering questions, there is such a thing as being too polished. That is why Romney will lose Iowa to Huckabee. That is why despite pardoning rapists who repeated their crimes, Huckabee will win and possibly take the Republican nomination. People can sniff out a fraud, which Romney is; and they can sniff out someone genuine; which Huckabee is.

Now some of you will push back and ask, ‘What about Bush?’ He is a fraud and yet the public reelected him.

True, but John Kerry (who actually won) never seemed overly genuine himself. And Bush played the fear card so well everyone was afraid of gay people and dark skinned men with beards. That was enough to make a close race. And despite Bush’s fraudulence, he was still seen in 2004 by many as a sincere man who was going to kill anyone who even looked at the U.S. funny. That has now even been exposed as a lie, but Bush’s handlers knew then that they had to portray him as sincere in his single-mindedness to destroy terrorists and make hard decisions and then stick with them. Moreover, Bush sounds sincere since he is not smart enough to be glib like Romney.

Either way, I could see more clearly after Sunday’s shows why Huckabee is rising and Romney is sinking. Not that I am going to vote for the guy, but seriously, check out the populist rhetoric.

I mean, look, the reality is, I’m not the choice of the chattering class, never have been, don’t really care if I am. The Wall Street and Washington punditry does not think I’m going to be the next president. And they don’t want me to be. You know why? Because they don’t understand that I’m connecting to the people they don’t know. I’m connecting to the people out there who are waiting tables and driving cabs and handling bags.

They don’t know those people. I do. I come from those people. And the people of this country are looking for a president who understands what America really needs in a president, and that’s somebody who doesn’t just talk to the people on Wall Street and in the Washington social circles, but who actually has had to work for a living and get where he has by struggling every step of the way.

Messaging, sunday talk, Huckabee, Mitt Romney | No Comments »

Gore continues to show he has found his voice and his stride. Last week at the Bali conference on climate disruption, Gore lashed out at U.S. intransigence. And rightly so.

And look at his messaging: “moral imperative”, “find the grace to navigate around” the U.S., and “expand the limits of what’s possible,” and “moral imagination of humankind”.

Morality (x2), grace, ingenuity, limitless possibilities. These are all great themes that inspire people towards higher purposes. And all have spiritual/religious connotations. That is the kind of language you need to get more people on board the climate disruption bandwagon. People need moral inspiration, and telling them they can save civilization by expanding the limits of what is current reality will give them a direction and purpose.

Especially when in the other breath you are blasting the U.S. for obstructionism. If you are going to attack someone, you had better be ready to sooth the ire of the patriotic by giving them something else to be patriotic about. And Gore did that.

Of course, that will not stop the White House or John Bolton from going medieval on your you know what, but that just means you are saying the right things.

Messaging, Climate, Al Gore | No Comments »

The Bali climate talks achieved something, kind of, but more on that later. Meanwhile, back here in the states, the Pentagon said its stance toward Iran had not changed in light of last week’s NIE that stated Iran gave up its nuclear capability in 2003.

Nice.

Just like the Bush administration to look facts and reality in the face and ignore them. This video from the Council for a Livable World lays it out pretty nicely.

I have to say, sticking to your guns is a good political and messaging tactic, especially in the face of adversity, but there comes a time when you should retreat when it is clear you have been busted. Not this crew. What is interesting is that this NIE report was delayed three times by the White House. So they knew the contents way before it was released, and they must not have liked what they saw, or else they would not have delayed it three times. This also means the original report was even more damaging to the neocon White House agenda.

Can the Democrats pick up this angle and run with it please? This particular deception regarding Iran is serious business; one the public will not take to very kindly if progressives make it a big deal in the MSM. This could really harm Republicans, since all of them running for President, other than Ron Paul, are Iran bashers.

But I doubt the Democrats will do much here, since they feel incapacitated on defense/foreign policy issues. If they know what is good for them though, they will ride this one all the way to the bank.

Messaging, Iran, Analysis, Foreign Policy | No Comments »

I heard was not very good, mainly because the moderator would not let anyone challenge anyone else.  The Democratic debate tomorrow will have the same format and will suck as well.  You may as just read their policy positions on their websites.  Less time consuming and you might learn more.

But this debate was more an exercise of trying to go after Huckabee than anytime before, especially Romney.  But by go after, in this context, means trying to steal his thunder.  How did Romney do it?  By talking about helping little people and the middle class.  In other words, a more populist economic message.

Interesting tactic.  See, everyone thinks Huckabee is gaining momentum because he has convinced evangelicals he is the man to stop abortion.  Or something.  But Romney’s tactics lay bare the primary reason people are flocking to Huckabee.  His populist message.

Even the majority of evangelicals are not loaded with cash, and they do not understand the Republican Party’s obsession with given tax subsidies to corporate behemoths.  They too can relate to the threat of losing their home to sub-prime mortgages or holding two jobs and still falling behind. We will see how Huckabee ends up, but if Romney is playing the populist card, you can be rest assured his people know what the real current behind Huckabee is.
This should be a clear indicator to the Democrats to bury any inklings they have about needing to play to the middle economically.  The public, even the conservative ones, do not think Wal-Mart or Exxon-Mobil need tax handouts.  Populist economic lingo wins hearts and minds.  If the Democratic nominee does not go full tilt towards anti-corporate, pro-working class economic platform, and Huckabee is the Republican nominee, the Dems could be in trouble.

Bottom line:  Enthusiastically embrace progressive economic policies that support the poor and the working class.

Republicans, Analysis, Economy, Mitt Romney | No Comments »

Wow, racism exists ln places and in ways not readily apparent.  Sure, I knew the criminal courts were biased and stacked against African and Latino Americans, but I have never really had hard core statistical proof, especially when it came to the differences between crack and cocaine sentencing laws.  Nor has anyone really reported on it in the MSM, except maybe way back in the late 80s/early 90s when we started passing stiffer crack possession penalties.  Recently no one has cared.

But now the Supreme Court does.  They decided this week that crack laws unduly punish racial minorities compared to powder cocaine laws.  How?  The penalities are harsher for crack, but the majority of people in jail for possession of crack are racial minorities.  The majority of people in jail for cocaine?  White.

The conservative court was able to see this clearly racist discrepancy in the law.  For once some good news coming out of the SCOTUS.   So if anyone ever tells you the courts are not stacked against minorities, you know have some proof to refute them.

Racism, Supreme Court | No Comments »

So Al Gore actually picked up his Nobel Peace Prize today.  And the new left of center Australian Prime Minister, in his first act of state, ratified the Kyoto Protocol on climate disruption.  Australia, along with the U.S., was the only other industrialized nation not to ratify Kyoto.  Now there is one.

What if the Supreme Court had not let politics interfere with their recount 2000 decision and let the recount in Florida go ahead as it should have?  Gore would be President and then there would be no industrialized countries who are not party to the Kyoto Protocol.

Let no one say, with these two examples, that having different leaders is not important; that one party is the same as the other.  True, they may not be as far apart as we would like, or as they make themselves out to be, but who runs the country is important.

I was a Nader supporter with the best of them.  His attacks on ‘Republicrats’ rings true.  But apathy in the face of maddeningly frustrating inaction in Washington is no justification for claiming both parties are the same.  Hopefully the Democrats can make this case during the Presidential election with a few clear examples like the two above.  They need to show they will change how things are done in Congress and the White House.  That is the appeal of Obama.  He seems like an agent of change.

Not so much Hillary.  If she gets the nomination, she will have to convince many a skeptic that she will be a new sheriff, not just a proxy of what has come before.

Couple of interesting observations.  First, CNN said 56 percent of Americans now think global warming is a proven scientific fact.  Only 56 percent?!  That is pathetic.  I wonder what other industrialized countries think?  Someone find that poll data for me.  I want to know how our lame 56 percent stacks up with other similar countries.  We clearly have more work to do to convince the public that global warming is a scientific fact.

Second, Fox News was claiming the the Nobel Peace Prize was a lefty award.  So that means that peace is only a liberal quest?  If so, then war is a quest for conservatives?  Look, if Fox News wants to claim that only liberals care about peace, and by default, conservatives are war mongers, they can go right ahead.  Now we just need an intrepid progressive to point that out while on Fox News.

Elections, Climate, Obama, Al Gore, science | No Comments »

Has the recent NIE report stating Iran gave up its nuke program in 2003 stopped Bush’s push for war with Iran? Temporarily, sure. In fact, it may stymie the administration so much that they will not get the war with Iran bandwagon rolling again before the Presidential race heats up, effectively stopping any military action against Iran.

But who knows what Bush will do. What we do know is that despite the revelation that he knew about the contents of the NIE report in August, he made dire warnings about WWIII in October regarding Iran getting nuclear weapons. That is, he knowingly lied about the threat of Iran developing nukes. Moreover, he is trying to defend that statement by claiming the new NIE report does not diminish the Iranian threat!

The sheer gall of it. Fierce anti-war critic Rep. John Murtha comes back from Iraq and says the escalation is working. The NIE comes out and says Iran is not developing nukes and Bush keeps rolling with the ‘bomb Iran, I was never wrong position.’ True, Murtha still wants us to leave Iraq, but his position is undercut by his claim the escalation has reduced violence in Iraq. The fact undercut Bush’s position, but he does not care.

This is a great example as to how to deal with facts contrary to your position. Ignore them or claim they actually support you. Bush has a prestigious intelligence report basically eviscerate his claims regarding Iranian nuclear ambitions, and he turns it around and says the report bolsters his position! How sweet is that!

Murtha could have done the same in Iraq, saying something to the effect of ‘we told you the escalation would not produce the political reconciliation necessary for stability in Iraq.’ In Murtha’s case the claim would be true, unlike Bush’s.

And the knockout punch by the right on this new NIE report? Attack the messenger. I have discussed this before; it is a time honored messaging tactic so I will not go into details. But essentially Limbaugh, Bolton, et al criticized the report as inaccurate and politically motivated. So according to them the NIE, (more…)

Messaging, Iran, Political Frame, Foreign Policy, CIA - intelligence, attack the messenger tactic | No Comments »