So I won’t judge. But the TS’s “Toasts and Roasts” editorial does not have kind words for those who showed up to oppose the pending naval military drills off the west coast.
To many of the people who showed up just to hear themselves talk at the U.S. Navy’s meeting last week to discuss its plans to increase training off the West Coast. While all viewpoints are welcome, the seeming lack of interest in learning about the project means that many didn’t get much out of the meeting. The theatrics didn’t help people understand the real concerns — and there are plenty of real concerns — over the Navy’s plans and likely made many wonder if the dissent was just a sounding board for radicals.
I received a much different report from a caller on my radio show last week, so I won’t assume the accuracy of the TS perception. But I do think that progressive activists do have to rethink their methods. Right or wrong, demonstrations and rhetoric without focus can be detrimental to a cause, and certainly to rational discourse. It’s not enough to be loud. We have to learn to persuade. It requires engagement and a rational understanding of your opposition sans demonetization and oversimplification. We aren’t heard if we don’t listen and don’t engage.
It’s true of other debates as well, including Richardson Grove. Demonstrations, whether street or at planned attendance of public meetings, have to be thought out in terms of specific goals and overall strategy. And as I’ve suggested, action should not be about personal gratification as some sort of therapy to feel important. It must be about the issue at hand.
71 comments
Comments feed for this article
December 21, 2010 at 5:46 pm
Moonshadow
Eric said: “. . . opposition sans demonetization . . .”
really? You want them to be de-monetized? (monetization: convert into or express in the form of currency.)
I think you meant DEMONization.
[puts down red pencil]
December 21, 2010 at 5:50 pm
Moonshadow
Seriously tho’ Eric’s point is one I’ve been trying to make to those I know, and have known, in the progressive movement for a long time. Unfortunately they do not seem to understand that while their actions may make them feel good and garner a bit of press, they do little to bring about dialogue and a solution.
Solutions come from the sides (all sides) actively speaking with, and to, one another with respect along with genuinely listening.
December 21, 2010 at 6:17 pm
Eric Kirk
That was spellcheck’s fault!
Of course, I did get knocked out of the spelling bee on the word “biscuit.”
December 21, 2010 at 6:43 pm
Moonshadow
Thanks for the *laugh* . . . see technology can’t even help when your misspelling is an actual word.
December 21, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Joe Blow
Eric, “We aren’t heard if we don’t listen and don’t engage.” OH! Really? It’s the talker’s fault the listener judges him a dog and only hears whimpering and whining? Do you know how many comments I’ve made on your blog that end the thread? Engage. That’s a joke. Who engages a hate-mongering troll?
December 21, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Bolithio
I remember driving through eureka and Earth First had climbed on a log truck which must have stopped traffic for miles. I happened to be almost right behind it when it happened. They threw up banners and flags: “Save the Matole!” “End Old Growth Logging”! The funny thing was, the log truck, loaded with small douglas-fir, was covered in barnacles and had obviously just made its long briny trip from Oregon. Not old growth, not from the Matole. I asked one of the kids standing there where the logs where from: “thats old growth from the matole, man…” Right. I got back in my car and watched the mascot in the owl costume get chased around by the cops. Funny. I thought about what the hundreds of people will think about the ’cause’ as they sat in traffic for an hour, only to finally see earth first getting dispersed and arrested at the court house. Probably not winning over any new supporters.
My mom once told me that the hippies biggest problem in the 60′s was their inability to talk with people – in that there was a allot of talking at people, and this lead to the dilution of good ideas. Seems like nothing has changed.
December 21, 2010 at 11:01 pm
Eric Kirk
I’ve posted this adbusters article excerpt before, and I think it really expresses volumes as to why the left has largely failed in this country.
We all know where this stuff comes from. Anyone who’s ever been to a lefty political meeting knows the deal – the problem is the “spirit of inclusiveness” stretched to the limits of absurdity. The post-sixties dogma that everyone’s viewpoint is legitimate, everyone‘s choice about anything (lifestyle, gender, ethnicity, even class) is valid, that’s now so totally ingrained that at every single meeting, every time some yutz gets up and starts rambling about anything, no matter how ridiculous, no one ever tells him to shut the fuck up. Next thing you know, you’ve got guys on stilts wearing mime makeup and Cat-in-the-Hat striped top-hats leading a half-million people at an anti-war rally. Why is that guy there? Because no one told him that war is a matter of life and death and that he should leave his fucking stilts at home.
December 22, 2010 at 7:07 am
Mitch
“…everyone’s choice about anything (lifestyle, gender, ethnicity, even class)…”
WTF?
December 22, 2010 at 8:11 am
Moonshadow
Eric . . . personally I think the left has largely failed because, irrespective of the political theater (stilt walkers, etc.), its various groups and members have failed at listening. Back when I was active with EF! the spokes council of NCEF! tried to discourage the activists from engaging loggers and others at protests individually. Their fear (justified) was that people would just end up shouting at one another and things would spiral out of control.
Once, in front of the Courthouse and the then unfinished new jail, I got into a respectful conversation with a logger in a black Camaro with his family. It was not long before several other activists ran up and began to shout at him. Up to that point the logger and I had been polite and respectful with/to one another. I (as Judi often made a point of saying) told him I understood he had to feed his family and keep a roof over their heads . . . to which he said, “thank you for recognizing that.” I then began moving in the direction of, “well you know, your boss (PALCO) is going to put you out of a job if y’all keep cutting at the rate he’s got you doing.” He was nodding . . . I said the old cut rate under the Murphy family ownership was sustainable . . . but under Hurwitz he was going to be out of a job because under Hurwitz the cut rate was wildly unsustainable. I could see resignation in his eyes and thought he was about to agree with me when another activist ran up and began the shouting. KP ran up then to drag all of us away from the car . . . and what might have been a productive conversation went down in flames.
All too often I witnessed what might have been bridge building exchanges erupt into acrimony and verbal combat because one side or the other just would not speak and listen with respect. The EF!ers and the loggers were all guilty of this. The anger level was so very high that nobody was listening . . . or at least not very often.
In order to have respectful communications all parties to an issue need to be able to check their anger and outrage in order that they might listen. They need to listen from a place of respect and be willing to recognize the basic humanity of those who hold different views. Until that can be done there is no way any sort of common ground will ever be found.
December 22, 2010 at 8:18 am
moviedad
“Left” “Right”, what a bunch of nonsense. These labels only serve to hand control of the message, the meaning, and the reality of struggle to the controlling status quo.
Yeah, that’s real cute about how the hippies in the sixties couldn’t communicate. Speaking of Abby Hoffman maybe? Well Virginia, there were many articulate speakers in the sixties, who were speaking calmly. Noam Chomsky was just one of many.
Nice how the self-satisfied capitalists who call themselves progressives now mouth the propaganda of the ruling class, being comfortable with their incomes and status in the New American Century.
The problem with the so called “Left” is that they aren’t ‘lef’t of anyone who signs their paycheck. House-Slaves never revolt; it’s the slaves suffering in agony who revolt. Not the slaves who eat off their master’s plate.
December 22, 2010 at 8:30 am
Mitch
The reason the left has no power is that it is fighting the money.
The money owns the mainstream press and the churches, today’s primary means of control. That’s not to mention the military and the major corporations.
People do not need to find reasons to blame themselves for not succeeding. It is always a pleasant surprise when a victory for decency comes along, but they come about when a group of people has had such overwhelming smarts, desperation, and/or love that they succeeded in fighting against a massive tide. It should come as no surprise when the money wins instead.
As long as people in their twenties and thirties are reasonably well-fed and not worried about a draft, money will win. Now that money is so greedy that both situations may change, perhaps things will move forward.
MLK did not say that history moves quickly.
December 22, 2010 at 8:35 am
Mitch
And (since your Adbusters post has me a bit het up), Adbusters has always struck me as a classic example of an elitist left magazine that is completely disconnected from reality, thinking that unreadable graphics and “No Logo” logos will “brand” a revolution.
I’ll take the Catholic Worker (if it still exists) over Adbusters any day.
December 22, 2010 at 8:41 am
Joe Blow
Eric, I’ve said this before a time or two, “It is what you DON’T say that speaks to the truth.” I could have asked the question, “Who engages a gutless Democrat?” The “Left” have “failed” because they, people like you, think matters are still about “talking.” So, add blind and stupid to the gutless.
December 22, 2010 at 9:02 am
Joe Blow
Eric and supporters, to prove my point about ignorance, blindness and judging I offer this comment Eric posted over on the Humboldt Herald:
This is typical for an attorney. Usually a problem for the Elite, Superior Judging Class that can’t accept facts over beliefs (Republicans). The historical facts are that President Obama “killed the public option” right from the start. All you people that voted for Obama better get used to the fact, he sold you all out. 98% of the American people don’t have any money because since Ronald Reagan they’ve been looted of whatever value they believed they had. You know, like trying to get someone to listen to them! I can tell you for a fact, when a bully is about to kick your ass, trying to talk to him has nothing to with listening and everything to do with value.
December 22, 2010 at 9:26 am
Erasmus
Mitch: I couldn’t agree more with your comment . Adbusters is not only a slick magazine that rails against other forms of slickness, it flirts with anti-Semitism. In 2004 it published a list of the top 50 Neo-conservatives and highlighted all the Jews. Its treatment of Gaza and other Mideast sore spots is so one-sided it makes The Nation look even-handed.
December 22, 2010 at 9:36 am
Anonymous
try listening and engaging the folks who oppose the concerts in the park, and all the other invasive activities you want e. you talk a lot, but you don’t seem very good at listening to people who don’t agree with you on matters that are close to home.
December 22, 2010 at 10:54 am
Joe Blow
This cartoon pretty much says it all:
MacLeodCartoons James MacLeod
Cartoon on the mindboggling level of Democratic pussiness over the past two years is here http://tinyurl.com/lameduks
December 22, 2010 at 11:17 am
Eric Kirk
The reason the left has no power is that it is fighting the money.
The money owns the mainstream press and the churches, today’s primary means of control. That’s not to mention the military and the major corporations.
The money is a huge obstacle, but the assumption here is that if we could only get our message out to people who are being bamboozled by the money and media, they would see it our way and vote accordingly. We used to ask, “what if they held an election and everyone came” assuming that there was this mass of natural leftists out there just waiting to hear the right message. But just about everybody did come to an election a few years ago and we got Arnold Schwartzenegger.
I don’t doubt that the media creates visceral perception which influences elections, but the fact of the matter is that most people simply don’t think like leftists. The upside is that most are not conservatives either. History moves slowly because people change their collective minds slowly. If the majority of Americans really wanted single payer medicine badly enough to make it an election issue, we would have it right now.
Marx did the left a disfavor by conjuring up the notion of “false consciousness.” There are some stupid fickle voters out there, but I suspect they don’t number more than 10 percent. The rest know what they are voting for and why.
Joe – the public option failed because it was a political impossiblity due to the change in the role of the filibuster and conservative democrats. Had it been politically viable, Obama would have pushed the issue. He is a pragmatic technocrat, not the visionary he advertised – at least not in terms of short term gain.
But he did fundamentally alter the economy as it applies to healthcare, and we won’t reap most of the benefits until after 2012, and even if Republicans can chip away at it, if they don’t overturn the whole thing, people will start to receive benefits and then it will lock into the political landscape where Republicans have to start trying to “make it work” rather than overturn it. And it will gradually expand, as have the other programs in American history. It will be his legacy, even if he’s a one term president. All within the “left wing of the possible.”
If he were as cynical as you suggest, he’d put up mock fights to appease the left voters. I wish he would pick some fights, because fights can be instructive. But that’s not his way. In 20 years everyone will probably be calling him a genius. If we’re still around.
Anonymous 9:36We listened anonymous. To the whole community. You got 400 signatures. We hear you. We don’t agree with you. But we will do our best to mitigate your concerns while meeting the needs of the community as a whole Unfortunately, for a few of you, it’s your way or the highway. Or I should say, your way AND the highway. And the airport and gravel operation.
December 22, 2010 at 11:56 am
Joe Blow
Eric says, “Joe – the public option failed because it was a political impossibility due to the change in the role of the filibuster and conservative democrats. Had it been politically viable, Obama would have pushed the issue. He is a pragmatic technocrat, not the visionary he advertised – at least not in terms of short term gain.”
I’m always amused when I receive a comment of this caliber. Are you expecting everyone to just take your word for these assertions. You can’t PROVE what you say BECAUSE he DID NOT even TRY! NO PROOF, only biased, unsubstantiated opinion. Even so, as long as you look at these issues in isolation you can always assert contravening possibilities. When you consider the past three years worth of fact – what Obama said and what he actually did, you get an altogether different picture.
Second: “…he’d put up mock fights to appease the left voters.” He seems to have put up enough “mock” BS to fool you. It’s called “direction – misdirection.” His actions demonstrate that he has only done enough to keep the believers, people such as yourself, mollified. When in fact he sold out the “left voters” right from the start. Why would he support “left voters” when the whole country, with small exceptions, has gone totally Republican? He’s given conservatives and Republicans nearly everything they want and called in “compromise” to “mock” the liberal “left” progressives.
And third: (I just couldn’t pass this up.) “In 20 years everyone will probably be calling him a genius. If we’re still around.” Sorry, but the only way that’s going to happen is if he turns out to be the Antichrist.
December 22, 2010 at 12:21 pm
Moonshadow
*sigh* . . . I guess what I said about respect was overlooked, as a fair number of the posts following mine have been more than a little disrespectful.
Joe . . . Eric stated the facts to support his point; that the present filibuster format precluded moving the public option forward. I submit had he (Obama) done so it would have failed miserably and possibly dragged the rest of the health care reform down with it. As for Obama and the “left” . . . it is possible that the “left” let its own misperceptions cloud the picture. From the beginning Obama has seemed, to me, to be a pragmatist who seeks the achievable outcome rather than the ideal outcome. The ideal is wonderful as a way of shaping what can be achieved but is itself rarely achievable.
We in the “left” do an excellent job of dreaming but a terrible job of actualizing those dreams, or even parts of them. Mostly this is so because of an inflexible adherence to the (as Eric put it) “my way or the highway” style of activism and politics. It has been said that “politics is the art of the achievable” yet we too often fail to realize that the dreamed for solution is often reached in incremental steps . . . sometimes in excruciatingly slow fashion. That’s the only way it can happen when one is talking about the large numbers of citizens be it state, national, or in the world. The USA alone is over 308 million people . . . the solutions are not out on the extremes but somewhere in the middle. The middle is found by incorporating many different views and approaches.
December 22, 2010 at 12:22 pm
Mitch
The rest know what they are voting for and why.
I disagree, Eric. I don’t have them at hand, but there have been plenty of polls indicating that those who were rabidly against the health insurance reform were for the individual features of which it was composed. I think that’s true of much of today’s public policy.
When presented with the actual contents of legislation, majorities are in support. When presented with the brand name, the same majorities are in opposition.
I think we are all in denial about the power of media to frame the debate, and about the non-superficial aspects of corporate control of the media. Common sense is dismissed because the echo chamber reports that it is “idealistic impossible stuff.” Idealistic, perhaps, but possible in most civilized countries of the world.
No, I don’t think ExxonMobil sits down with GE/NBC/Microsoft to decide what story to push each night, but I do think that we now have one monolithic professional political class that has grown up bathed in the assumption that ExxonMobilGENBCMicrosoft represents the “serious” people. They don’t — they represent the greedy, who control the money.
December 22, 2010 at 12:32 pm
Moonshadow
Mitch . . . you make some very good points about the power of the media and I have to agree. However, I have to wonder what our individual responsibility is in that. No one can make us think, feel, or believe anything unless we choose to allow that. It would therefore seem to me that the problem is that our culture is becoming less inclined to employ critical thinking and analysis when confronted with an issue or argument. Instead, very quickly, the sound bite response/reaction comes into play and is not dissected.
With all the specialty news channels there we can watch only news reports that tell us what we want to hear rather than what the actual facts are. We are no longer pulled out of our comfort zone by the media. But we allow that to happen. Critical thinking is something I see less and less of around me. I see and hear way too many people saying, “I believe [_____] because I read it, saw it, or heard it on [________]! They don’t fact check or look for alternative sources wherever they might be. If FOX said it is so then it must be so.
That happens because we (whoever we are) allow that to happen.
December 22, 2010 at 12:39 pm
Mitch
There’s plenty of blame to spread around, Moonshadow.
But blaming people for lower standards of critical thinking these days is a bit like blaming people for smoking tobacco. Today’s most powerful technologies, as enhanced by decades of university research, are being devoted to convincing people that shouting is thinking, and that “they’re all equally bad.” The dumbing down of news and the creation of infotainment may just be side-effects of the quest for dollars, but they’re real.
The Surgeon General should require a large warning sticker on every TV sold.
But yes, if people were more disciplined and less lazy, the effects would be better-tempered than they’ve been to date.
December 22, 2010 at 12:44 pm
Joe Blow
Moonshadow says: Joe . . . Eric stated the facts to support his point; that the present filibuster format precluded moving the public option forward. I submit had he (Obama) done so it would have failed miserably and possibly dragged the rest of the health care reform down with it. REFORM???
Sorry. Without a vote or at least put to a vote what you and Eric say is only conjecture. Someone’s opinions are NOT facts or proof of anything. But then none of this is about “proof” or “facts,” is it? When you accept someone’s opinion as fact or truth because of who or what THEY think or believe they are, you run the risk of acting on a lie. That’s fine with me, but don’t try to tell me that’s what I’ve got to do to be respectful. Put out the facts and I’ll make up my own mind, thank you.
Forcing those Representatives and Senators to go on the record might just have made them vote differently, but then we’ll never know that, now will we?
December 22, 2010 at 12:45 pm
Mitch
And Eric, let’s not forget “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” as a response to Bush’s being AWOL, followed by Dan Rather’s crucifixion. It’s as though it was all a test run, with K Street trying to see just how big a lie could be foisted on the public without news organizations calling foul. The results of the experiment were clear, and Fox was good to go.
December 22, 2010 at 3:18 pm
moviedad
Amen Mitch.
December 22, 2010 at 3:25 pm
Not A Native
Whether searching for the ‘guilty’ in the guise of benighted misguided liberals or bamboozled and unthinking voters, it seems to me like commenters here are forming a circular firing squad.
Fact is, liberal(ism) has been successful at changing the American psyche in some significant ways. The most recent elections should be seen only as a reminder that change isn’t absolute or eternal, not that liberalism is a failure.
IMO, if Ted Kennedy hadn’t died so untimely, some form of public health option would have been enacted. And liberal pressure to conclude the Iraq and Afghanistan adventures added to moderate dismay over the constant stream of body bags and deficit red ink, is making a difference. Right now, I’d say that nationally, liberals should be dedicating their ambitions to securing an Obama second term.
December 22, 2010 at 4:21 pm
Anonymous
e, i would beg to differ in that you have not listened to the whole community. the whole community has not spoken. of the community members who have spoken, more people spoke against concerts at the park than for them. you talk about mitigation, how are you going to mitigate the destruction of our brand of peace and quiet? how are you going to mitigate the destruction of our peace of mind? large loud concerts are incredibly invasive and destructive, on all sorts of levels. you are not doing what the whole community wants or needs, you are doing what you and a few others want.
December 22, 2010 at 6:16 pm
moviedad
With Citizens United in place it’s going to be president Palin, the foxy fuhrer.
December 22, 2010 at 7:24 pm
Dave Kirby
I’ve seen this movie before…it was 1964 and Barry Goldwater was the reep candidate. Lyndon Johnson kicked his Arizona butt. The tidal wave swept away a lot of GOP congressmen. Some of them were valuable public servants. The media keynote was this was the death of the conservative wing of the republican party. That didn’t happen. It is a pendulum… what goes around comes around.
December 22, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Eric Kirk
Anonymous 4:21 – even setting aside your hysteria around the alleged destruction of your “peace and quiet” in a valley filled with the sounds of the freeway, airport, and gravel operation, the fact is that the response to our fund raising for the zoning change has been overwhelming. There is only so much we can do about your “peace of mind” when you view what we are proposing as “large loud concerts.” We have made the effort, and we will do what we can, but the park is happening. You’re right that certain voices have not spoken. They are about to.
moviedad – I don’t think Palin is even going to run. She quit her governorship to make money, and if people and sponsors are going to continue to pay to hear her speak and wander around Alaska on film pretending to know something about the wild, she’s not going to want to interrupt it with a presidential run. Not unless there’s another book deal and television show in it for her.
Dave – Conservatism as it was known at the time disappeared. Certainly segregation is no longer in vogue. Conservatism isn’t dead, but I do think the conservative blowouts of 1972 and 1984 are past.
NAN – it’s simple. If the economy recovers by then in terms of blue collar jobs, he will win a second term. Otherwise he doesn’t have a prayer. The Republicans know this, and that’s why they are opposed to anything resembling a stimulus, even 9/11 responder money which is 4 billion dollars which will be spent in NY City mostly.
Joe – I certainly can’t prove what will happen in the future, but I have a pretty good feel for these things. We can pick up this discussion in four years if we’re both still alive.
Mitch – Kerry could have thwarted the Swift Boaters, but he let them get to him. He did come back by beating Bush in the debates (with help from Bush) but in the end I think Bin Laden’s last minute interjection pushed Bush over. People were scared. That benefits conservatives. But they did know the record. They knew the WMD thing was a lie, but they didn’t care. It wasn’t for lack of information.
December 22, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Eric Kirk
Rachel Maddow makes the case for Obama’s Presidency.
December 22, 2010 at 11:02 pm
Eric Kirk
It does look like filibuster reform is in the making, and I guess they don’t need 60 votes to implement it.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/12/22/931032/-HUGEAll-returning-Democratic-Senators-support-reforming-the-filibuster
December 22, 2010 at 11:11 pm
Anonymous
Obama got his ass kicked and he will be a one termer. None of your wishful thinking will change that verdict counselor. Clif and Obama will go down in flames together.
December 23, 2010 at 8:53 am
Mitch
She’s good, Eric, no question.
The question is, did Obama really get the best deals he could on each of his “victories.”
My answer is simply that I don’t know but I doubt it.
He appears to me to have got the best deals he could without mobilizing the people who voted him in, and without raising his voice at anyone except “liberals who won’t compromise.”
I still see a lot of fat and happy bankers and foreclosed homeowners, and I see a lot of fat and happy health insurance companies and no public option. Gaining “compromise” by buying off your opponents may be the best anyone can accomplish in today’s Washington, but I’d like to think otherwise.
December 23, 2010 at 8:55 am
moviedad
I have this picture in my mind of Mr. Kirk, black and white movie 1930′s holding off a half dozen rogues with his foil; parry, thrust. “Take that Mitch, Dave, Moviedad, Blow of Joe…Back, I subdue thee with my individual responses. You want my opinion? You shall have it Sir!”
(Kidding, kidding….)
I totally disagree, (lead, parry) I think the constant exposure is merely a ‘Ticket to Ride’ for her. She is kept front and center on the media that supports her. You are right about her going after money. Think of the payoff coming when she hands over the last vestige of democratic rule to global-national corporations. They have not taken all of our money yet. There are plenty of opportunities for business to steal more money from the working class. How about mandatory insurance on each one of our children; them charging what they want. How about paying directly at present University rates to send your child to elementary school. I realize I tend towards the dire, but that does not diminish its arrival.
I don’t think people understand what a death-blow to democracy Citizens United is. You tell me how many voters can resist targeted advertising and peer pressure to the tune of tens of thousands per voter? When those same corporations decide to buy an election; they can spend billions out of petty cash. Now what chance does a Bernie Sanders have against that?
It’s like “Move to Amend” is some scrawny Shepard kid being sent out against a battalion of Goliaths.
December 23, 2010 at 9:24 am
Erasmus
Moviedad apparently considers himself too intelligent to be swayed by heavy corporate spending on elections. I wish he were charitable enough to extend the same favorable opinion to the rest of us.
December 23, 2010 at 10:16 am
Anonymous
e-what an aggressive response about the park.
December 23, 2010 at 10:39 am
Anonymous
Making them actually filubuster like Mr. Smith with the media covering every word they say live and anything stupid going viral on the internets would go a long way towards reform. But I still think that sixty votes is too high just to bring a bill to debate. Maybe to close debate. It provides too much cover as it is.
December 23, 2010 at 11:14 am
Eric Kirk
Mitch – I agree with you about failing to mobilize people around causes, which would have been very effective two summers ago when Tea Partiers were stacking the town hall meetings. In fact, I’m on his list and other than to send money to some campaign or another and maybe volunteer for them, I’ve never received a call to action that I can remember.
I think pols in general are afraid to mobilize people. Certain interests did it with the Tea Parties and now they’re out of control. And I think Joe’s right that Obama had given up on the public option early, but the netroots forced the Democrats to keep it on the table which dragged the passage of what they got out several months until Lieberman essentially put the kabosh on it. We learned that no pressure had been put on Lieberman from the WH, probably because he and a couple of others made it quite plain that they would filibuster any bill with any hint of a public option in it.
But even Lieberman knows that the writing is on the wall. When the Democrats reclaim a house majority, I’m certain there will be a bill for a buy-in option for MediCare on a stand-alone vote (much the same way the DADT repeal was finally passed) and they will market it as simply adding another consumer option and guaranteeing competition – ultimately a “market solution.” And once the Tea Party crazies have retaliated, even a few Republicans will put their signature to it because HRC will have become an institution by then – assuming it survives the direct assaults of the next couple of years.
Moviedad apparently considers himself too intelligent to be swayed by heavy corporate spending on elections. I wish he were charitable enough to extend the same favorable opinion to the rest of us.
I agree. The Swift Boating worked largely because of Kerry’s anemic response. He should have agreed to appear on television with the guy, what’s his name, with the 15 minutes of fame, and called him out. But they played it too cautiously and with too much whining. In the end, they didn’t think he was a strong leader, and Bin Laden rattled nerves among the fickle 10 percent.
December 23, 2010 at 12:39 pm
tra
Clearly big money for advertising and organizing can sway some voters, at least some of the time.
But Whitman’s recent loss in the gubernatorial race, despite a huge fundraising advantage, should remind us that the candidate with the most money does not always win.
Candidate, message, and grassroots enthusiasm still matter. And therein lies the basis for hoping that democracy might yet survive the era of Citizens United.
December 23, 2010 at 1:21 pm
Eric Kirk
We learned that with Ross Perot and a slew of other self-financed campaigns. The “it’s-my-own-money-so-I-don’t-owe-anyone” argument has not sold well in American politics.
December 23, 2010 at 1:41 pm
tra
Of course the Ross Perot example cuts both ways: It seems unlikely Perot would have gone as far as he did without all his money.
One way of looking at it is that, at least in the big-ticket races, Big Money is a necessary condition for winning, but it is not, by itself, a sufficient condition, which is why having the most money in the race does not guarantee victory.
December 23, 2010 at 4:43 pm
moviedad
Where did I say that?
December 23, 2010 at 5:30 pm
Joe Blow
Eric:
Problem is, based upon what you write in this blog, in particular what you’ve had to say to me, you can’t prove what happened in the past either. The future’s got some real surprises in store for you, not that I give a rat’s ass one way or another.
Even so, thanks for really engaging once in a while. Of all the local blogs (not too many anymore) I visit and make comment, you are the only person adult enough to deal with the subject issues and not express offense at a differing point of view. Even though you can be snide and sarcastic once in awhile. However, you forgot to accept and to recognize, the other two qualities it takes to successfully communicate. Hence my redundant point, you, I and everyone else DO NOT have four more years frittering away our options yapping about worthless conjectures and egoistic opinions. You may have a good feel for somethings, but your viewpoint is limited to your beliefs. You are NOT impartial, or objective. You’ve sold your soul to this system and simply do not know any better. Nothing wrong with that, it just happens to be how it is.
As you may have surmised, I too am pretty good at what I am. That’s why you refuse to address some of the the key issues I raise, but no matter, I ferreted out what I wanted to know. So I ask, why does exposing the facts, and the truth threaten our freedoms and Constitutional rights as Americans? What happened to innocent until PROVEN guilty? Why are we all expected to accept the lies and fall in line like sheep to the slaughter? You continue to accept the corrupt and craven offered as the only choice to vote for and expect something to change for the better. Then whine and cry because there is nothing you can do about the “corrupt and craven.” In the meantime they loot, butcher by the millions, and destroy this earth and all hope for human survival. You want to know why? I’ll tell you anyway. Because they, these Elite Exceptional People you worship, believe Jesus Christ is coming back to Jerusalem in Israel in the very near future and take them all away to Heaven. So what’s a little climate change, hundreds of thousands of innocent lives that Jesus is going to judge to Hell, add to that genetically modified grain spread throughout the Earth that can’t reproduce and at the same time kills off all the natural grain and is permanently contaminating the Earth. And you choose to participate in and defend this slavery?
The Democrats, liberals, progressives – so-called Left thought they could reason with the conservatives, the Republicans, some sellout Democrats – the so-called Right. The problem is the Left never understood how the Right thinks or what their real intent is. The last 12 -15 years should have been a wake-up call, but obviously wasn’t. An old logger used to tell me, who happened to be a good Republican, when after trying to talk politics with Democrats, “You can’t reason with an idiot.” I always thought that was a bit hard, since it was really meant as a backhanded slap at me. Idiots or not, it’s time to standup and be counted. Just stop cooperating. That’s pretty much what the Conservative Republicans did the last two years. When you let people tell you how to think, rather than just give you the facts and let you decide, you grant them de facto stature and standing that justifies their attitude that you must be an idiot to believe their lies and go along with what they want.
Since it is my intention that this be my last post on this blog, I’m going to end this by being consistent with myself. EVERYTHING IS ABOUT SOMETHING DIFFERENT” whether you like it or not. You’d probably have things figured out Eric, if they were about the things you “think,” or more likely, “believe” they are. All this political shimmy shammy you engage in is really irrelevant to what’s really going on. Some of us live their lives so as to prove what is and what is not. Some call that proofing truth. This little truth doesn’t care what anyone thinks or believes: “What goes around always comes around” or as the ancient prophet and scholar said: “Do not be misled: ‘God is not one to be mocked. For whatever a man is sowing, this he will also reap.” You said in a recent post speaking about Obama’s conduct motivated by pragmatism: “And yes, it often means “collaboration” with slime and reaction.” That conduct is, by definition, the craven corruption of sin. America reaps what is sows – the whirlwind.
December 23, 2010 at 5:31 pm
tra
Where did you say what?
December 23, 2010 at 5:36 pm
tra
“Where did you say what? ”
That was directed to Moviedad…I was wondering whether your 4:43 question was a response to my 1:41 comment or whether it was referring to someone else’s comment, maybe Erasmus’ 9:24 comment?
December 23, 2010 at 6:02 pm
moviedad
Yeah, Erasmus thinks I feel that I am smarter than everyone else. I don’t remember saying that at all.
December 23, 2010 at 6:57 pm
tra
“I don’t remember saying that at all.”
You’re right, you didn’t say that. But I think Erasmus’s snarky charaterization does at least hint at a relevant point. If you and I and quite a few others are able to resist the onslaught of Big Money and see through all the advertising, spin doctoring, and astroturfing that money can buy, then the question is what makes us different than those who are taken in by it?
Don’t get me wrong, I agree that the Citizen’s United decision is huge step in the wrong direction for our already far-less-than-perfect form of respresentative democracy. Together with the rest of the status-quo system of Big Money Influence, from PACs to lobbyist donations to party committees to self-financed billionaire candidates, Citizen United’s addition of virtually unlimited and often secret contributions from corporations and wealthy ideologues places even more plutocratic weight onto a system that is already creaking from all the undue influence at the top.
Still, I think that it is not entirely unrealistic to hope that more and more people will learn to see through all the propaganda and bullshit, enough so that the influence of Big Money will be blunted, or even reversed.
December 23, 2010 at 7:12 pm
moviedad
But if that is the case, there is always plan: B, which is another Ohio, Florida debacle. I mean, they own the supreme court. I’m not worried about you, me or just about anyone else on this blog. But it’s the people who don’t believe in propaganda, or don’t believe that Exxon could bankroll a candidate to the tune of a million dollars and us not know about it. Many “on the fence” folks will be swayed. They already believe most of what they see on television.
December 23, 2010 at 10:00 pm
stake sandwitch
As if any questions asked or lies politely listened to are going to change the Navy’s decision to destroy the ocean where we live.
No, those who have power do whatever they want no matter how polite, intelligent or engaging the “discourse”.
It is all the rage these days for perpetrators to stage meetings to listen to your concerns, answer your questions and feel your pain before they volunteer you or what you love as sacrifice. Then we can blame ourselves (or someone else) that we didn’t say it right, didn’t ask intelligent enough questions or didn’t listen politely enough. Eric, you are a butt-hook.
December 24, 2010 at 10:18 am
Moonshadow
stake sandwich . . . how does yelling, screaming, and disrespecting at those that you have already said, “. . . have power do whatever they want no matter how polite, intelligent or engaging the “discourse” get them to do it our way? According to you they’re going to do what they want regardless.
Yet I submit you and we have a better chance of changing minds if we exercise a little civility.
December 24, 2010 at 10:40 am
Eric Kirk
Well, whether we change the minds of the Navy reps, we have a better chance of appealing to the public at large if we don’t act like spoiled children.
But hey, I’ve never been called a butt-hook before. You’re a garter belt so there!
December 24, 2010 at 1:23 pm
stake sandwitch
“Spoiled children”!
Come on, Eric, you keep digging your hole deeper.
The most honest, invigorating and clear comment that I heard in the Navy world cafe, was the guy who said “I am afraid of you! I hate you!” It is the sane response to the Navy’s reechy lies and terrorism. He should have gotten a standing ovation. Maybe the rest of the country could learn how to access their own healthy anger instead of popping or smoking some more medication for their “depression” and fiddling with the remote. And then they get permission from blue-diaper-baby elite progressive intellectuals that you don’t have to participate if somebody’s honesty bothers you. Everybody is busy trying to quell the rage of themselves and others. It is so delightfully distracting and destabilizing. The idea that we are supposed to calm ourselves and be reasonable so that others will notice how good we are while we’re being reamed is absurd.
December 24, 2010 at 1:28 pm
Eric Kirk
stake sandwitch – again, leave the stilts at home. It’s not about your personal issues. It’s about policy which impacts millions of people one way or another.
December 24, 2010 at 4:47 pm
stake sandwitch
Oh, don’t worry about stilts.
We’re already on stakes, and the fire is being lit.
December 24, 2010 at 5:36 pm
Anonymous
e-the park, the park, all the monied interests, lots of what you have said here could be about the god damned park. you will be having a negative impact on everything that lives there, no matter much you mitigate, mitigate, mitigate. why should your vision destroy others reality, just so a bunch of boogie yahoos can get totally drunk/stoned.
December 24, 2010 at 7:37 pm
Anonymous
Island of misfit toys Eric. I’m telling you.
December 24, 2010 at 9:56 pm
podsnap
Eric! Great News!
Just check the Humboldt County Zoning Regulations and you will find on page 26 of chapter 4 that the Rural Residential-Agricultural Zone (currently the Park’s) allows, with conditional use permit: civic uses including public assembly, public recreation and open space and private recreation. You can stop telling everyone that only hog farming is allowed now and that if you don’t get some expensive big box development mixed use zoning that the park is going to spontaneously break out into ranchettes, or close down entirely. You can save the Park tons of money, use all those donations to pay off the park debt and create a real management plan, and maybe get some leadership and board training.
December 25, 2010 at 10:07 am
Happy Birthday JC
podsnap, how can you even compare the US Navy’s projects and the CP project to rezone? Given the fact the CP BOD and their supporters only compare Central Park in New York, Stanley Park in Vancouver, or Golden Gate Park in San Francisco, etc. as they envision the CP’s future.
How dare you use this thread to down play Eric and his position as a CP BOD. Keep up the good work and be well. God bless everyone on this day, the day of his birth. Remember to recycle.
December 25, 2010 at 11:44 am
Anonymous
That didn’t even make sense. I think the park nay sayers are starting to freak out.
December 25, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Lance Boyle
What else do freaky people do, they freak out. Get your freak-on man and bleepin FREAK OUT. Do they scare you when they freak out, alone in the dark. It only makes sense if you FREAK OUT MAN. Freaky people are strange when your a stranger. Black Keys rock……….
Now that was freaky man….
December 25, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Anonymous
not a park nay sayer, just a loud, stoner, drunk concert venue nay sayer. leave the park a park, hiking, biking, small weddings, memorials, a COMMUNITY park, not a concert tourism venue with a shit load of stoned, drunk strangers.
December 25, 2010 at 2:04 pm
Anonymous
Oh no! Not strangers!!
December 25, 2010 at 2:53 pm
Anonymous
Oh, don’t worry about stilts.
We’re already on stakes, and the fire is being lit.
And where is it going?
December 25, 2010 at 4:44 pm
podsnap
Are you calling me a Park Naysayer, Anonymous? Don’t be silly.
No, protecting the Parkland from development of big box venues and housing is actually advocating for preservation of the Park.
Really, check out the Humboldt County Zoning Regulations and then go to the County GIS website. You will see that it’s okay the way it is. The Park doesn’t need to be rezoned at all in order to be a Park. It is great news and will save the Park, since now the Board can pay off the Endless Park Debt with all the donations they are getting and when they step down from their nine year terms in 2011, they will have finally achieved their purpose of securing the park for the benefit of the Southern Humboldt Community.
December 25, 2010 at 5:00 pm
NorCal enema bandit
I don’t see anyone freaking out about the Arcata Community Forest. Oh yeah it has public oversight and protections, unlike this “Community Park”. Why is it called the “Community Park” again, oh yeah, the “Community” paid for it and what is the oversight, a tiny group of small time private want-to-be concert & festival producers. And why, because of the “Community Culture & Need’s” and “Economic Development Planning” (SoHum non-profit code for “All Night Boogie Partay with pole strippers and beer bongs, parking & tip included”).
December 25, 2010 at 9:30 pm
stake sandwitch
“Yet I submit you and we have a better chance of changing minds if we exercise a little civility.”
Changing whose mind? The Navy’s? Oh, please.
If we’re all nice and polite, do you really think that the rest of the country is going to politely rise up and ask ‘em not to do it? I just don’t see it. We will be portrayed the way the media wants even if we all show up in business suits. Then america would really think it’s just fine.
I hear what you’re saying about the stilts, Eric, but I think Europe has been far better at being heard by their government because they put up barricades and throw cobblestones. In most countries, if that coup d’etat of 2000 happened they would have just gone in there and drug the guy out. Doncha think?
December 27, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Full Circle
“E” said back on Dec 22;
First @ 11:17 AM-”Anonymous 9:36 We listened anonymous. To the whole community. You got 400 signatures. We hear you. We don’t agree with you. But we will do our best to mitigate your concerns while meeting the needs of the community as a whole Unfortunately, for a few of you, it’s your way or the highway. Or I should say, your way AND the highway. And the airport and gravel operation”
Second @ 10:23 PM-”Anonymous 4:21 – even setting aside your hysteria around the alleged destruction of your “peace and quiet” in a valley filled with the sounds of the freeway, airport, and gravel operation, the fact is that the response to our fund raising for the zoning change has been overwhelming. There is only so much we can do about your “peace of mind” when you view what we are proposing as “large loud concerts.” We have made the effort, and we will do what we can, but the park is happening. You’re right that certain voices have not spoken. They are about to”
“E”, You have not heard bleep you arrogant bleep. Just say you don’t give a flying bleep about the 450 plus people in this Community that oppose amplified Concerts & Festivals at the Parks, after all they are the Community and not Park Detractors as you and other Park Directors have stated from time to time. You better check your “Noise Assessment Report” again. You will notice how Highway 101 and the County Airport are not included as factors in the Noise Assessment Report for the Park. But Randall is a factor, a big factor, and the Park Board has a business partnership with Randall and the noise they produce. You disagree with the Community? These Parks are only about Community and the public benefit it brings, not just about the Park Board and their slanted vision or only what they think is good for the Community. Everything said by this Community in the beginning (2001) at the first public meeting has come full circle again. What goes around come around. FYI, your best is not good enough to mitigate bleep, you are ramming a Park Board only vision down the Community’s throat, with no remorse or accountability, behind closed County doors. You treat this Community as if we are wood pile babies and the Park Board had to adopt us, well bleep you very bleeping much.
December 28, 2010 at 9:53 am
publicparkadvocate
It doesn’t seem like the Park Board loves the beautiful Parkland that they now say THEY have “acquired”. It doesn’t seem like the Park Board goes to the Park much, or they wouldn’t keep saying that the freeway and the airport are “down there”, since they are not. Check out the Park Board’s bylaws on their website: nothing at all about protecting the environment, but it does say one of their purposes is …”to benefit individuals…”
This “project”, under this board appointed by an individual, is far more like the Forester-Gill project, or the balloon tract, (mixed use development projects) than like Golden Gate Park, which is owned by the city and county of San Francisco.
December 30, 2010 at 11:57 am
The Substance of a Twittering Democrat « The Joe Blow Report 2
[...] Joe Blow Report came to a towering decision this week, wrote a specific comment to see if the decision was justified – it was, so now we move on. From the beginning of this blog [...]