No Hoofs On The Ground – Moon of Alabama

March 15, 2006

No Hoofs On The Ground

With so much dead weight, it will impossible for the donkey to get the cart moving in 2006, 2008 and beyond.

Democratic leaders shy away from censure plan, Houston Chronicle
Feingold Draws Little Support for Censure, Forbes
Forget Censure, Dems Say the Debt Is the Threat, ABC News
The Feingold Resolution and the Sound of Silence, Washington Post

Feingold:

"I’m amazed at Democrats, cowering with this president’s numbers so low. The administration just has to raise the specter of the war and the Democrats run and hide … too many Democrats are going to do the same thing they did in 2000 and 2004. In the face of this, they’ll say we’d better just focus on domestic issues … [Democrats shouldn’t] cower to the argument, that whatever you do, if you question administration, you’re helping the terrorists."

Posted by b on March 15, 2006 at 17:52 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Bush enjoys the same position as Tony Blair: his opposition is in such a state of disarray that he can get away with most anything.
It has been said that the Democrats fared so poorly in recent elections because they lost touch with Middle American Values, church-going families and Nascar Dads.
This may be true, but MAV’s don’t necessarily correspond to party lines. We saw that over the opposition to Bush’s plans to tamper with Social Security. Middle Americans might believe in private enterprise and self-reliance, but they saw what happened to the employees of Enron and WorldCom who entrusted their pensions to the private sector.
And Dubai Ports deal did not play well with a Middle America that does not understand the difference between a good A-rab (one who sells us oil and lets us station troops on their soil) and a bad A-rab (one who sells us oil and wants to blow up the troops we have stationed in other Arab countries).
And while most Middle Americans might oppose abortion, most Nascar Dads still want to know that daughter has a bolt hole in the event that she does not fully live up to pledge to abstain only.
The Democrats are failing to play to their strengths on these issues.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Mar 15 2006 18:32 utc | 1

The NSA has all necessary dirt on this crop of Dems, who will keep grumbling but never too loudly. Of course, that probably makes Russ Feingold the cleanest man in America.

Posted by: mats | Mar 15 2006 19:00 utc | 2

This is a about misplaced trust.
People who expect the Democrat Party to substantially differ from the Republican Party have misplaced their trust.
The means to gaining elected office is to collect tens to hundreds of millions of donated, private dollars. Those are then spent on massive media campaigns to create a media image of yourself, and image that looks trustworthy to voters.
How the hell would they know? They’ve never even met you, and never will.
Who has met you? Corporate and wealthy donors, who let you know over lunch, over cocktails, or in a congratulatory note exactly what policies, bills and regulations they want you deal with, and exactly how.
They put you in office, and it is they who will keep you in office next time around.
They are who you work for, not those pesky voters.
They are just people who have misplaced their trust.

Posted by: Antifa | Mar 15 2006 19:05 utc | 3

Anyone who thinks the Dems are going to save them are dreaming. Nothing will change until the inevitable implosion happens. It must happen under Kaiser Bush’ dictatorship. Then start with a “New Deal” under President Kucinich ( After you can no longer charge your Prozac on your credit card.)

Posted by: pb | Mar 15 2006 19:06 utc | 4

Blackmailable Senators should be thrown out of office. They are no good to us.

Posted by: gylangirl | Mar 15 2006 19:07 utc | 5

To believe that the Democrats have a different “world view” than the Republicans is near delusional. I am amazed that they are constantly being accused of “spinelessness” and “cowardice” for not standing up to policies that they are substantial agreement with.
Their schtick is that Bush & co. are “incompetant” and that they can “do it better”. And they don’t even wish to push that too hard lest it “alienate swing voters”.
The dream of DLC is that the Bush admin will so totally collapse that the Dems can acquire power without committing themselves to any fundamental policy changes, either domestically or internationally. It will be a slightly different brew with the same ingredients – militarism, Zionism, and globalist/free trade.

Posted by: tgs | Mar 15 2006 19:29 utc | 6

Democrats are “Good Germans”

Posted by: Cloned Poster | Mar 15 2006 20:42 utc | 7

As the crisis of capital accumulation becomes more intractable, the illusion of representative government will become more obvious and the legitimation of power will be seized by overt coercion.
This is a time of danger, but also opportunity. At least Feingold did something. I’d like to think he could strike out on his own, as Molly Ivins suggests today.
Eh. Pipedream.

Posted by: slothrop | Mar 16 2006 4:01 utc | 8

here’s one idea for education through expanded discourse & a spark for lighting a fire under people – reinvent the four-minute men from the WWI days, only this time countering official propaganda. the four-minute men was a division of a massive govt propaganda campaign to shape public beliefs and behaviors to govt & big biz interests in support of the war, the centerpiece being an army of influential community members who regularly delivered “rousing” speeches, following calculated talking points & guidelines provided by a central ministry, in all types of settings, to all types of peoples, like delivering quick speeches to movie theatre audiences or social clubs or school classroom. the four-minutes refers to the emphasis on brevity & focus on memorable slogans that could then be carried out into the larger community.
i haven’t thought all of the details out yet, but rather than a centralized coordination of a new breed of four-minute people, a decentralized approach would invite more people to participate. the main idea is to reach people at a grassroots level, bypassing television & radio. the wealth of topics to speak out on is practically limitless. so much opportunity to counter the official line. polls show that the numbers are there to draw support from. the idea session for the four-minute person would entail an audience of 15-20 people at a time if open discussion is encouraged. however, there should be attempts to encourage critical thought across a variety of settings.
in addition to the concept of shaping influences on those who have yet to explore critical interpretations of official recieved wisdom, there are carryover benefits that promote more active participation from those already informed but perhaps frustrated at the lack of effective avenues for promoting change. if enough people would take it upon themselves to engage in public speaking of this type of manner, however creative they want to make it, perhaps it could spawn a larger movement, operating outside of the normal heirarchial channels of thought control. people need encouragement right now. times are bleak. blogs do have this affect on shaping beliefs & providing information to a certain degree, but their reach is limited to narrow demographics and they hardly address a solution to our fragmented, atomized society the way that only good ole face-to-face interaction can.
these are some thoughts i’ve been exploring lately, as i think the concept of the four-minute men may be useful in the battle against corporate & govt propaganda. using the “enemies” tactics/accumulated knowledge against them, using the master’s tools to dismantle his house, seems very practical & promising.

Posted by: b real | Mar 16 2006 5:21 utc | 9

CP,
read your link. I cannot even disagree with most of it but I do not see the point of spewing vituperation about one’s neighbor while offering nothing positive to rectify it.
Every nation has its dark side and its dirty little secrets (Canada has Wayne Gretzky, for example), and a major superpower is going to have some pretty damn major dark secrets. The point is to keep them from overwhelming themselves and the rest of the world.

Posted by: ralphieboy | Mar 16 2006 5:22 utc | 10

“the four-minute men was a division of a massive govt propaganda campaign to shape public beliefs and behaviors to govt & big biz interests in support of the war”
Posted by: b real | Mar 16, 2006 12:21:39 AM | #
That’s just it b real they were a ‘massive government organization’.
If they are willing to nuke any group or nation who ‘might’ be a danger to them, How long do you think you or I would last as a pamphleteer?

Posted by: pb | Mar 16 2006 6:02 utc | 11

I make a habit, one might say an intifadah,
of saying hello to everyone I meet, like in
the old days around where I grew up. I can
remember when the new police chief came to
town to replace the retiring sheriff, an
old John Wayne sort who would clock you up
side the head if you were overly rowdy and
haul you off to the hooshgow for the night.
The new police chief was into uniforms and
badges and guns and handcuffs and shoulder
radio in our little town of 10,000. And he
would drive around looking straight ahead,
because he didn’t want to let on that he
had the ‘eye’ on everyone. Three girls I
know waited until he passed, and then gave
him a beavershot I’ll bet he never forgot.
They found him, his deputies did, slammed
into a telephone pole after running down
a row of the new parking meters, drunk as
a skunk after visiting the local whorehouse.
Anyway, back to my jihad. I always look
straight in people’s eye and try to twinkle
a little, observe the day, try to project
how they see the world, ‘your dog looks
like he’s having fun (sniffing up another)’
kinda thing. And sadly, more than half of
the people look straight ahead like the
chief cop, or frown a little, to let me
know that kind of friendly behavior is to
be discouraged. It’s post 9/11, after all.
I ride and walk a lot, and see a lot of
people, but the best I’ve seen in months
were two old people who looked like French
Resistance fighters or Depression-era ‘bums’
sitting on a bench, sharing a sandwich. I
said, ‘nice day’ as I passed, and they both
just broke out sunshine and hi-howdie like
you wouldn’t believe, like I was talking to
Jean Cocteau and his dear wife.
And I remembered another guy, Harry Partch,
I met just before he died when he gave a
retrospective of his career he began in his
‘Genesis of a Music’ in his song, “Let us
loiter together so we can know one another.”
Maybe the way to defeat the Bushi’ites is
just profoundly simple. Loiter in public!
Look at each other and say good morning.
Ask another person if they need a hand.

Posted by: PingPing | Mar 16 2006 6:23 utc | 12

I often get the distinct impression that we’re all just along for the ride. Opposition to Bushco is a myth.

Posted by: ben | Mar 16 2006 7:14 utc | 13

@ben:

No, there’s plenty of opposition. The myth seems to be that it makes any difference to those running the government. (That seems to be what you meant, but I can’t stand the thought of what you actually said.)

Posted by: The Truth Gets Vicious When You Corner It | Mar 16 2006 9:35 utc | 14

I like your style PingPing. I try to do the same. Bridge the fear. When it works it feels so right and you know, I think it’s a little contagious.

Posted by: beq | Mar 16 2006 13:17 utc | 15

Following PingPing’s example:
Paying for the random commuter behind you at the toll booth helps also. It feels good to surprise yourself and others. Costs just a buck or two but makes their day. And the toll worker’s day too.
Beats those ubiquitous ‘report suspicious activity’ signs.

Posted by: gylangirl | Mar 16 2006 15:34 utc | 16

A Peculiar Politician by Wm. Greider

The real story–naturally overlooked by cynical editors–is that an honest truth-teller is loose in the fun house and disturbing the clowns. Man bites dog, senator defends Constitution.

snip

For the moment, however, let us celebrate the man. The club will try to shove him in a closet and forget his little unpleasantness ever happened. I hope they fail and other Dems are properly embarrassed. Amid scandals in high places, Senator Feingold is fresh air. The country should rise up and sing.

Posted by: beq | Mar 16 2006 16:27 utc | 17

If they are willing to nuke any group or nation who ‘might’ be a danger to them, How long do you think you or I would last as a pamphleteer?
this logic is part of what i’m trying to suggest that some type of populist campaign would help to address & dispel. are we really at a point where such a level of fear or paranoia is warranted? i just don’t see it. being afraid of these characters solves nothing. and not acting, in whatever capacity, because there’s a possibility of personal discomfort or retribution hardly makes the path we’re headed toward more appealing. yes, the groups that are in power are dangerous. but they’re not that dangerous. yet. and they’re not that massive – in terms of popular support. as long as there’s the opportunity to act – which there still is – then to not take advantage of those opportunities is to never know what is possible.
whether or not the division of four-minute men example is entirely applicable to today’s very atomized society of individuals, the idea of citizens taking on more responsibility for affecting change is crucial if this regime is to be tempered. the only solution to neutralizing their financial & military strengths will involve creativity and numbers. writing off anything at this point b/c of fear only destroys the potential for motivation. the problems we face are not insoluble, but the answers are not going to come from visualizing defeat.
we are all giants, raised by pygmies, who have learned to walk w/ a perpetual mental crouch – robert anton wilson

Posted by: b real | Mar 16 2006 16:43 utc | 18

“the idea of citizens taking on more responsibility for affecting change is crucial if this regime is to be tempered. the only solution to neutralizing their financial & military strengths will involve creativity and numbers. writing off anything at this point b/c of fear only destroys the potential for motivation. the problems we face are not insoluble, but the answers are not going to come from visualizing defeat.”
Posted by: b real | Mar 16, 2006 11:43:11 AM | #
I agree completely but what you are suggesting requires massive organization which needs leadership. Who will lead them? Is all I ask. Not me is all I’m saying.

Posted by: pb | Mar 16 2006 20:04 utc | 19

Back to Main