Listen to Bull Moose? Better Mull Booze!

"The only jihad many in the left-wing in the party are interested in is the one against the party's former vice presidential standard bearer."

With senior Democratic Leadership council spokesmen like this one, who needs enemies?
Oh my.

Stop the Bull, ban the Moose!

The Greatest American Value

"In the end the people make up their own minds and this is going to be a people’s campaign"
I think Loserman has a point here, but not in the way he might think. After the great experience of yesterday, who's gonna deny that people made up their mind and that the people's campaign was victorious? And, (sry, now I may sound to idealistic, but its the view of a foreigner) what topic has a very high value in the people's mind? Democracy! It's a value deeply embedded in US history, it's part of the american way, and it always has been one of the most distinguished aspects of US identity. And its main rules aren't really difficult to dig, one of them is you can decide to compete for a position, you campaign for your cause, and then comes the day when your fellow countrymen decide.

But that's exactly the point, it's one day of voting, it's THE day, and if you're not elected, you respect the result and wait for next turn. You don't simply do the stubborn, spoiled kid, ignore the decision and pretend that this try doesn't count and that you are entitled to restart the game. We all now this behaviour from our youth or from young sister, brothers or friends, but it's not adult behaviour, especially is it not democratic behavior . The system simply wouldn't work if everybody would feel entitled to ignore unfavorable outcomes and go on, so nobody is allowed to do so (Kant, right?). And in mayn US states, they have such 'sore loser' laws, it just a historical coincidence that CT is not among them.

Imho, what has to be done now is to generate a lot of buzz about voting and democratic rules. Many citizen simply don't think much about the philosophy of democracy, it's something that is simply there, it's taken for granted. But there always has been a lot of emphasis on what makes America great, so not much campaigning is needed to bring it back to conciousness. And especially the organisations that pretend to pursuit the poeple's interest have to be targeted. They have to answer the question if it is according to their ideals and their mission if they support undemocratic manoeuvers. And the emphasis has to be that seeking a second chance to run for an election may be technicaly not forbidden, but that it violates core US values. Imho it should be possible to spread the insight that Loserman is following a deeply unamerican idea and that no patriotic citizen or group should lend him a hand. If the NGOs can be pusged into the defensive on that issue, they will have to drop support for Lieberman, and certainly many private donators would think twice, too. If Sore Loserman insists on spurning the very principles he purports to defend, ok, but he should be aware that it might be a lonesome voyage.

(originally posted at FDL, but to be honest, I'm too tired to engage in a long discussion now. And I suspect that I'll find this posting incredible naive if I take another look at it tomorrow. Well, however.)

Stop the Bull, ban the Moose!

K, Ned has won, Hooray!, and I made a lengthy post at MyDD about a guy who is a total spoilsport. Sadly, so far I have no responses on it, but that's the problem with MyDD, it's not a good blog for comments (I doubt they ever reached 300). K, since this site needs some content now and then, I'll repost it here. Rant on:

Marshall Whitman, a.k.a. the Bull Moose, is a sore loser!
Pls check his latest post at his blog:

A few years back the Moose [sic! Pluralis majestatis! Gray] broke with the Republican Party on a range of issues dealing with economic justice. His reasons for leaving the GOP are explained here.

As the Moose indicated, just because he became a heretic on the right, he certainly did not join the left. At another time he would be in the mainstream of the Democratic Party. Alas, that Scoop Jackson wing today is miniscule.
...
So where does this situation leave the Moose? He is an economic progressive, cultural tradionalist and a hawk - a mammal without a party who continues to graze in the political center.
http://bullmooseblogger.blogspot.com/

Ok, surely some will say that's just the usual, whiny bull from the moose, but I think this statement is very significant and should have consequences. He clearly states he is not in the mainstream of the Democratic party, and in the end even openly says that in reality, he is without a party. You can't say it any clearer than that.

Now, his political identification is his personal business, except for the fact that he is still senior spokesman for the DLC. Shouldn't someone who is speaking for a mayor Democratic organisation be a convincing and supporting member of that party? After this statement by Whitman, is there any logical explanation why he should stay in the DLC any longer? When will this insider club finally make a decision on this matter?

I want to add a concrete example why Whitman shouldn't be allowed to speak for the DLC anymore:

Marshall Wittman of the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, who supports Lieberman, said Lamont has allowed himself to be defined by his left-wing supporters.

"Had it not been for the involvement of the Democratic left, the party would be fairly united going into midterm elections," he said. "The Lamont campaign can be potentially devastating to the party, not in 2006, but in 2008. At a time of horrific news for the Republican Party, this is the only silver lining they have right now."
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la- na-lieberman9aug09,0,4115180.story?page= 2&coll=la-home-headlines

Yes, that's in the LA Times right now!
Is that the official position of the DLC? That the result of this primary "can be potentially devastating to the party"? Even if some might think so, is it acceptable or even reasonable for the DLC to say so in public? And is it the mission of the DLC to give the republican party hope for a "silver lining"? It is my understanding that tomorrow at 11 will be the important unification meeting of the Dems. Doesn't this irresponsible statement from Whitman make this mission more difficult?

Imho the last thing the Dems need right now is a senior speaker who only cares for his personal ideas of the right direction and who shows a blatant disregard for party interests. Someone has to pull the plug from this egocentric running amok. Now.

(originally posted here: http://mydd.com/story/2006/8/9/0569/07635 )
((But it's really a lame discussion at MyDD))
(((Even though I like the site, especially Matt's postings)))