Friday, September 16, 2005

The charge of the loony brigade...

Seriously, you guys.

'Occupied' New Orleans?

Really. Keep her in the news. Please. We could run a ticket of Orrin Hatch and Strom Thurmond's ghost and win in '08 as long as Cindy keeps in front of the cameras.

Don't believe Drudge? Check the Huffing-paint post. It's the last paragraph in the rambling diatribe...

5 comments:

Patrick Armstrong said...

Running a dead guy for President: 500 million dollars.

Seeing loonies scratching their heads wondering why they lost to Slimer: Priceless.

But oh, so true.

I totally didn't believe the Drudge Report on this one. Hell, I even closed the browser window, reopened and went to the Huffington post independently (thinking how easy it would be to just fake the URL)...guess what. Still there.

Cindy, your 15 minutes is up. Please return your seatback to the upright position and enjoy your flight back to California.

That's waaay off the deep end.

Buzzzbee said...

Sorry bro, I've gotta disagree with you on this one. Cindy said something stupid. That's something we've all done at one time or another. She just has that hippie outlook of a soldier, especially one on American soil, is better with a bottle of water and an MRE, than an AK-47. That's her opinion. I happen to disagree. I believe that lawlessness anywhere in America is unacceptable. What Cindy Sheehan does that you and I cannot is she makes the cost of the war something tangible. You and I can spout statistics about how many soldiers have been killed and how many have been maimed and how many families aren't whole anymore until we're blue in the face and it'll never strike same cord as a greiving mother telling how HER family isn't whole and talking about what SHE'S lost. When the country looks at our party and says that we have no spine, it's not because of what side of the issues we're on, it's because when people on our side stand up and say something; we pull the rug out from under them. Why? Because we're afraid conservative hacks like Matt Drudge and Sean Hannity going to convince America that we're wackos? Maybe if we stood up and fought back they wouldn't win every public argument. You don't have to agree with everthing someone says, but don't tell them to go home and shut up just because a conservative tells you that person is bad for our party. Mrs. Sheehan's personal experience makes her a valuable asset to our side. She's able to show Bush for what he is: The guy who's sends your kids to die without a good cause. Can you imagine if the republicans kicked out everyone who said something stupid in public? They'd have no one left. Instead, they say "I disagree, but he/she still has the right to say whatever he/she feels." Two weeks later, when the American public has forgotten, they go on with business as usual.

Patrick Armstrong said...

Yes, but in this instance (and others) Ms Sheehan isn't really talking about the war. Now, she's talking about something just because everyone else is talking about it. With nothing really to say, she just makes it up. "Occupied New Orleans and the six people I met there..."

I'm not pulling the rug out from under her, she's pulling it out from under me.

We're going to end up on totally different sides of this one, I can tell. In my opinion and my experience, our side isn't winning many debates in public forum becuase we're giving the microphone to the craziest of us and then defending their arguments. Yes, we all say stupid things every once in a while, but this is like an endless procession in front of the microphone. Our pundits aren't standing on the rug at all, they're outside screaming at the rain to stop making coffee.

As for the other side, they pick up so much yardage when we do this and they loose so little when they do it. When Pat Robertson goes around saying "we should assassinate people I don't like," half the right says "what, Pat Robertson's a nutjob. We know." The other half says, "what's wrong with what he said, anyway," knowing that will bait at least one bonehead on the left into defending the merits of Hugo Chavez as opposed to pointing out that Pat Robertson just wants to kill people. As soon as you make that rhetorical turn, there's no coming back. They don't have to wait two weeks for people to forget, they wait until the next leftie pundit calls a press conference, grabs the microphone, and says something stupider about the stupid things a righty said.

For example, even though Rove was pretty much dead and buried for threatening our national security apparatus for political gain he just laid low until the left went bonkers over the Supreme Court. They don't even have to change the subject anymore, we do it for them.

I'm sick of it, for one. I will no longer defend indefensible positions taken by folks on my side of the aisle. I will not give up on the left as Reagan, Zell and Sam Nunn did. I will fight for the soul of the liberal movement against the crazies who would make it irrelevant. I will continue to call them on their BS, at the same time calling the right on theirs. Cindy had her moment, but she doesn't speak for all the troops, nor does she speak for all the bereaved parents.

But, as a bereaved parent, she had her leeway to talk about the war. I didn't agree with it, but I defended the merits our society gives grieving mothers.

She had one issue she could talk about with abandon: The War. Because it directly affected her family. That was her only thing. She has strayed from her own subject. She has strayed so far from her subject, in fact, that she has now alienated herself. This 'new expertise' on all things government has proved to me, at least, that she is now just a mouthpiece and a press conference.

As part of the extended New Orleans family, (for my family has yet to return home) I have said it loud and clear: Cindy, your services are not needed down South. Please go back to California where the damage you can do to your own causes is limited.

This has nothing to do with fear of Hannity or Drudge or any other make it up pundit. This has to do with raising the standards on our side of the aisle.

My opinion, anyway.

Buzzzbee said...

I understand where you're coming from, but I firmly believe that these idiots can only hurt us as much as we let them. When we hear these people say things stupid and proceed to engage in an argument with the right about how that section of the left is wrong and how we and the right are correct we only hurt ourselves. By engaging in discussion about this, we give the issue creedence. It should be simply put: "I disagree, but I'm not going to be baited into arguing about something so (Insert Adjective here, example stupid, trivial, etc)" This sort of thing gets us off important issues like the massive failures of FEMA, Tom Delay's crooked dealings, Karl Rove's leakgate, and so on. You hit the nail on the head when you alluded to our lack of focus. Our party acts like a kid with ADD. We can't stick with an issue long enough resolve it. What you have to remember though, is that the progressive side will always be diverse when it comes to opinions and beliefs. That's just the nature of a progressive movement. What have to do is let people know that just because someone affiliated with us says something that's wildly off base, they shouldn't just assume that's it's a belief held by all of us. Just to make sure everyone knows I've drafted a letter to America from people like us.

DEAR AMERICA,
THE IDEA THAT THE MILITARY SHOULD LEAVE NEW ORLEANS IS A BELIEF HELD BY CINDY SHEEHAN. IN ALL PROBABILITY, SHE IS THE ONLY PERSON ON THE PLANET WHO BELIEVES THIS. SINCE THIS IS NOT A BELIEF HELD BY ME OR ANYONE ELSE I KNOW OF IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, I SEE NO REASON TO DEBATE IT WITH ANOTHER PERSON WHO ALSO DISAGREES. THIS WOULD BE A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME AND COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO THE MORE RELEVANT ARGUMENTS CURRENTLY GOING ON THAT ARE ATTEMPTING TO PREVENT ANOTHER SITUATION LIKE THAT IN POST KATRINA NEW ORLEANS. IN THE FUTURE IF YOU HEAR SOMETHING THAT'S SOUNDS REALLY STUPID COMING FROM AN EXTREMIST WITH A MICROPHONE, JUST ASSUME THAT WE DISAGREE UNTIL YOU HEAR US OFFICIALLY SAY OTHERWISE.
THANKS
THE LEFT MAJORITY(ESPECIALLY ROBERT BUSBEE AND PATRICK ARMSTRONG)

I think we would both endorse that letter.

That should be the official response of the democratic party, but most likely when asked they'll just fall into that same old republican debate trap. I still do not think Cindy Sheehan should go home. I think she should remember what she's really fighting for, and we should treat this comment as what it really is: ONE OPINION by ONE PERSON.

Patrick Armstrong said...

That letter is right on the money. 'Since noone I know agrees, I see no reason to debate this with someone who also disagrees' is a great line.

I totally endorse the letter, my problem is that I don't think anyone will read it.

If it were only that simple, we'd have won in the last eight Congressional elections. The right is just as, if not more diverse, than the left. That's why more libertarian conservatives like SAWB and Tucker Carlson get lumped in with folks who want to replace the Ten Amendments with the Ten Commandments. That's why dyed in the wool conservatives, like my roommate, are so scared of hyper-religious folks having power.

I don't want to appeal to the wide diversity of the progressive movement, or cowtow to the conservo-pundits who think of themselves as populists.

I want to appeal to the great American Consensus of which I am already a part. The great big beer drinking, video game playing, sports watching, don't tread on me center that is mad about all things poltical cause we'd rather be doing something else. I ain't gettin' told what to do by some expert know-it-all or by any nose- in-my-business preacher. The loud, proud, obnoxious and adorable majority. That's who I want to speak with (not for.) That's why one thing I get back to is Representing the 'Party' Wing of the Democratic Party.

'Cause we all know you gotta fight for your right to party.

The revolution will be televised on all major networks and cable channels.

Damn the man, save the Empire.

The progressive movement must win over my heart and my mind if they want me to pay attention to their particular causes. Just like the wide diversity of the conservative movement must do the same.

Herein lies the difference, and the real crux of me not giving loony folks on our side any more slack that I give wacky folks on the other side: I'm not just going to sit around and wait for anyone to sell me a message. I'm going at them with a message that I think resonates with people because it resonates with me.

Credibility: That message is not to tolerate silly ideas no matter where they come from. I would rather see a Republican win Senator Robert Byrd (D - West Virginia)'s seat than to keep that old Klansman around. I don't agree with the war not because I'm a flower-power, war-is-never-the-answer peacenik, but because I don't believe a word that comes out of George W. Bush's mouth.

So, yeah, I'd love to have everyone (like my Pops) read that letter and come to me everytime some dumb pundit for my side opens their mouth.

"Patrick, do you (and other liberals) really believe this?" "Hell No, Pops, that's just crap that people say."

But folks don't do that, and I don't really expect them to, cause they've got other things on their minds. They assume that, unless otherwise stated, that's what all liberals believe. That puts us at a significant disadvantage in the National Debate, because we come into any conversation already alienated and seperate from the mainstream and already suspect in credibility.

That's not a good place to be if our purpose is to change the status quo and fight the powers that be.

My opinion.