Author's posts

Stupid stupid stupid media analysis of Giuliani’s “failed strategy”

How stupid is the political media?  This stupid: they take seriously the notion that Giuliani’s decision to avoid the first six Republican nomination contests was a failed “strategy.”

It was a strategy of sorts, I suppose, in that had Rudy been able to pull off a win in Florida he could very well have been positioned to land a death blow in the Northeast and California on Stupor Tuesday.  But calling it a failed or foolish “strategy” ignores the fact that it was not his free choice or original intention to run to win the nomination in this way.  Rudy waited until Florida for one reason only: because he was hemorrhaging support in the wake of the “Sex on the City” scandals highlighting his misuse of city resources (including the police) in conducting his affair with Judi Nathan, and he needed to lay low.  His alternative to this “strategy” was not to run hard, under the bright media spotlight, in Iowa, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Michigan Nevada, and South Carolina.  His actual alternative at that time was to drop out in disgrace.  He has been running since last fall to avoid that end.

Stupid stupid stupid media analysis of Giuliani’s “failed strategy”

How stupid is the political media?  This stupid: they take seriously the notion that Giuliani’s decision to avoid the first six Republican nomination contests was a failed “strategy.”

It was a strategy of sorts, I suppose, in that had Rudy been able to pull off a win in Florida he could very well have been positioned to land a death blow in the Northeast and California on Stupor Tuesday.  But calling it a failed or foolish “strategy” ignores the fact that it was not his free choice or original intention to run to win the nomination in this way.  Rudy waited until Florida for one reason only: because he was hemorrhaging support in the wake of the “Sex on the City” scandals highlighting his misuse of city resources (including the police) in conducting his affair with Judi Nathan, and he needed to lay low.  His alternative to this “strategy” was not to run hard, under the bright media spotlight, in Iowa, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Michigan Nevada, and South Carolina.  His actual alternative at that time was to drop out in disgrace.  He has been running since last fall to avoid that end.

A strange call to a Senator today regarding telecom amnesty

This is weird, but I thought I’d pass it along.

I hadn’t gotten around to making calls until today due to the press of the upcoming primary.  Between 11 and 11:30 Pacific Time, I reached most of the targeted Senators in person, and left messages at most of the others.  It was the standard spiel: (1) you should require truth for reconciliation — the question of what punishment the telecoms had earned was separate from the question of whether they had committed crimes, but we’ll never find out what crimes they committed if we pass this amnesty; (2) it damages our system to let those with great lobbying resources get away with having committed crimes with impunity; (3) the grassroots are really, really upset about this issue and it isn’t going away.

In most cases, I spoke to a young man or woman, mostly polite, sometimes diffident.  Having suffered through my speech, without fail they all politely thanked me and promised “I’ll pass that along to the Senator.”  (Tim Johnson’s guy also accepted my good wishes and told me he’s doing well.)  I was at most a tick mark on one side of a ledger for them, if they followed through on that promise at all, but one call was a little different.

What Loretta Sanchez said about impeachment

As part of my campaign duties, I attended a public meeting last weekend where (the fairly liberal but not as liberal as her sister Rep. Linda) Rep. Loretta Sanchez spoke and answered questions.  One question was about post-election impeachment of Bush and Cheney, which the questioner suggested ought to be the price of a willingness to support Hillary if it came to that.  I want to recount, from faulty memory and without much commentary, at least up front, what she said.  Then I’ll give my reactions.

Wavering over the kingmaking

I get the sense that a lot of people out there — not necessarily a plurality, but enough to justify having a public conversation with them — share roughly my preference order with respect to the remaining non-Gravel Democratic Presidential candidates.  In terms of what I’d like to see in a nominee, I’d give Edwards a 90, Obama an 84, Clinton a 72, and I’ll explain where Kucinich fits in later.  So here’s where I stand after today’s debate, and y’all can hash it out in comments if you want.  There’s no special reason that you should be that interested in what I think, so there’s no particular reason that you should be abusive in comments.  I’m mostly setting this down as my own diary for the record, so I can refer to it years down the line.  (Thanks again, buhdy, for providing this service.)

Prognostidigitation: You read it here (well, part of it on Big Orange) first

In the Iowa wrap-up diary last week, I posted this comment.  It turned out to be prescient, so I’m going to flog it a little.  The key insight is that, without an incumbent running, Iowa and New Hampshire are generally won by different candidates.  This year, that worked in both parties.  Part of this may be due to Granite Staters desire to defy expectations, part to the less populist and more libertarian politics of the state, and part of it may be due to the different campaign strategies and tactics (and infrastructure) required to win the two states.

Anyway, having said four days ago about the race what people are saying now, I’m going to take a victory lap.  Yes, this is obnoxious; we’ll all get over it.  I think what we’re likely to see now is Edwards decides to withdraw if he doesn’t do well in Nevada — assuming (as I expect) that he does prefer Obama over Clinton — and tosses his support to Obama, most of which sticks on Feb. 5.  But unless Obama beats Hillary by over a 60-40% margin on Feb. 4, this will not be over for a long time, for reasons discussed below.

Majority Leader Dodd Must Be Replaced

August 3, 2008

Chris Dodd’s ascension to Senate Majority Leader after Harry Reid resigned that position in February 2008 was a time of great hope for the netroots.  His Presidential campaign was strong on the issues; while it did not catch fire with the public it brought him great esteem among the netroots.  When he defeated Joe Biden for the position by one vote, we expected great things from him.  Instead, the past six months have brough bitter disappointment.  It is time for him to resign.

Chris Dodd campaigned for President calling for an end to the occupation of Iraq and a restoration of the Constitution.  And yet, Chris Dodd has failed to prevent yet another appropriation — albeit a smaller one than requested — to keep troops in Iraq through the end of the year.  And he has been unable to prevent passage of a FISA bill that, while it does not offer immunity to telcos, also does not state unequivocally that the President was violating the law.  Finally, he called for funding for programs that would fight global warming, and none has been forthcoming.

We had the right to expect more.  Dodd didn’t deliver, and so he must go.

“You cannot work after you turn 65”

As many of you know, I am currently on vacation in the Philippines — a working vacation of sorts, if you count life work, in that I have met for the first time my five stepchildren, two stepgrandchildren, father-in-law, the sole remaining sib of my wife’s whom I had not met in the States, and about 150 other relations whom my wife has absolved me of the need to keep straight.  (I’ll meet them when they visit — which I’m told they all will, if they can help it.)

I also met my wife’s friend, principal of the school that my stepkids attend, which is evidently (having been chosen because of how much my wife values education) among the best in Pampanga.  (That is the province containing Clark Air Base, which — until Mt. Pinatubo erupted after having waited until the Cold War was safely over — was along with Subic Bay the major U.S. base in the region.)  The friend is turning 60, so competent that the school’s owner has begged her to stay, but is going to emigrate to the U.S. instead.  After all, she said, you’re supposed to retire at 60.

Oh really, I said, and after some stupid blundering on my part it came out that you were supposed to retire by 60 but had to retire after 65.  “Had to” as in “cannot legally work.”  Cannot take jobs away from the younger people who need them.  I had lawyer’s questions about how truly true this was — what if you are self-employed, I don’t think I thought to ask, but there were others, and from both her and my wife the answer was firm.  Cannot work.  You lived on savings, on the support of your family, on the kindness of charity — or not at all.

Reports of my demise have been greatly accurate

I’ve left Daily Kos as “Major Danby”; my GBCW from that account is here.  It’s about time; that handle was going to keep on causing trouble for me, as people thought I was (or was pretending to be) former military, and the prospect of that becoming a campaign issue made settling it intolerable.

I’ll talk to buhdy about whether I will continue with that name here, when I’m here, or whether to switch entirely to a new account.  (I’d like to be able to do the former and yet retain the ability to come back and use the latter when I have to prove to people that yes I do have a coveted low-two-digit ID.)  While I have started a new account there (did some time ago, in fact, though I’ve scrupulously never used it) I’m going to lurk a DKos for the next three weeks, and possibly through next year’s elections, though knowing myself I highly doubt I’ll be able to withstand the urge to comment.  I may or may not participate or lurk here while I have computer access, which may be sporadic.

With so many of my friends here, I just wanted to let you all what’s going on.  (And the next person to call me “sir” has to clean the latrines.)  Enjoy your weekend, everyone!

My diary history at Daily Kos, part 2

Well!  I put up part one of my annotated diary history at Daily Kos (the annotations are what make it something new) last night, and when I tried to put up part two tonight it was administratively removed.  So I’m going to post it here and link to it.  Initially, I’m going to post it as one huge file if I can; then I’ll break it up into multiple pieces.  (I’m not sure what the posting limitations are here.)  I had origially wanted it to appear in one diary, so maybe this will turn out for the best.  I stopped when the software here refused to post anything more.

It’s leading up to pretty much what you’d expect.  Sorry to use up so much of your space, buhdy, but you owe me.  (I’m not sure for what, but I’ll think of something.)

This diary may be the most self-indulgent thing that I’ve ever seen on [DKos], so I’m posting it at a quiet hour and asking that people do not recommend it.  (I mean it.  I don’t want to spawn imitators.)  Note that I’ll soon be traveling, possibly without computer access, so my year here is over and I choose to mark it in this way.

When posters have complained about a lack of reader response, about never making the Rec List, and so on, I’ve sometimes suggested that they take the word “diary” literally.  A traditional diary may one day be published, or may serve as grist for a memoir, but it is foremost written for ourselves, to memorialize our own thoughts.  (We just happen to do so out here in the open.)  If we’re lucky and so disposed, a diary may also change others’ thinking and perhaps the world.  Regardless, it has value in its being written and being ours.

And so: here is part 2 of an easy-to-read annotated list, from latest to earliest (in proper blog form), of every diary I have written here at Daily Kos as Major Danby (less the first 78 that I listed there.)  Thanks to Markos, the CEs, and my friends and readers for helping me generate, publish, refine, defend, and now compile the work described below.  Without you, there would have been nothing.

Unruly Dharmanians will love this book on the Constitution

Ported by request

An old political friend of mine – whom I describe after the jump – has written a book on the 1780s, the decade that led from victory in the Revolutionary War to the enactment of the Constitution.  It’s called Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution; I think it’s brilliant.  Given that it’s by an old friend, you shouldn’t take my word for it; consider instead that it was up for a National Book Award last month and is now ranked #6111 at Amazon.

I have rarely seen a more perfect book for netroots bloggers, who are among today’s Unruly Americans.  It focuses on the period between victory in the Revolutionary War and ratification of the Constitution.  It argues that what we love about the Constitution – primarily the Bill of Rights – derives not so much from the political philosophy of the great and familiar Framers of the document, but from the common men of the time who refused to bend to them unless their interests were secured.  On reading it, you will recognize the arguments and passions of their day, which echo into ours.

(More below.)

Unruly Dharmanians will love this book on the Constitution

Ported by request

An old political friend of mine – whom I describe after the jump – has written a book on the 1780s, the decade that led from victory in the Revolutionary War to the enactment of the Constitution.  It’s called Unruly Americans and the Origins of the Constitution; I think it’s brilliant.  Given that it’s by an old friend, you shouldn’t take my word for it; consider instead that it was up for a National Book Award last month and is now ranked #6111 at Amazon.

I have rarely seen a more perfect book for netroots bloggers, who are among today’s Unruly Americans.  It focuses on the period between victory in the Revolutionary War and ratification of the Constitution.  It argues that what we love about the Constitution – primarily the Bill of Rights – derives not so much from the political philosophy of the great and familiar Framers of the document, but from the common men of the time who refused to bend to them unless their interests were secured.  On reading it, you will recognize the arguments and passions of their day, which echo into ours.

(More below.)

Load more