A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
July 10, 2006Gandelman On JoeThe Moderate Voice's Joe Gandelman has been on tour with his dummy, but he's set aside time to write about Joe Lieberman's predicament. One comment on the post notes that other Senator's are receiving primary challenges. The reason the Lieberman challenge has a bit more resonance is that, unusually, the challenger has received national support. While the goal, to enforce party discipline, has a certain logic, the message that centrists may hear may be similar to what pro-life Democrats heard when Bob Casey was frozen out at the 1992 Democratic Convention--that a certain type of centrist Democrat is not welcome in the party. Ironically, Democrats have gotten behind Bob Casey, Jr. in his race for a Senate seat in Pennsylvania. The trend in the Democratic Party has been toward the left lately, with even DLC Democrats like Mark Warner catering to the YearlyKos crowd. I don't think this will hurt them in 2006, which will be more a referendum on Bush's 2nd term. But in 2008, they won't have Bush to rally against, and centrist independents who are dissatisfied with the current administration may find the next Republican nominee more friendly to them. Posted by Blogadmin at July 10, 2006 03:01 PMComments
Uh, Blogadmin, my friend, you do realize that the Bob Casey link actually refutes your citation, don't you? Posted by: Blue Jean at July 10, 2006 04:00 PMJean is quite correct that Paul Begala refutes the allegation that Gov. Casey was denied a speaking role at the 1992 convention because of his support for abortion, alleging that the real reason was that Casey had not endorsed the national ticket. However, Gov. Casey strongly disagrees. His memoirs point out that Jerry Brown's sister, Kathleen Brown, was permitted to address the convention, even though she had not endorsed the nominee (Bill Clinton) either. Commenters I've come across on the internet point out that Brown's brother was still technically a candidate for the nomination at that point, and she had, unlike Casey, pledged to support the eventual nominee. It looks pretty clear to me that the DNC looked desparately for a legitimate-sounding reason to deny Casey a platform to make a strong pro-life speech, which would have highlighted the disunity in the party (which disunity was successfully masked by the Clinton years only to reappear now, apparently). Posted by: PatHMV at July 10, 2006 04:19 PMBJ, Casey himself says he was not allowed to speak because he wanted to give a pro-life speech. Others who did not endorse Clinton were allowed to speak. Others who were pro-life were allowed to speak as well, but not on that issue. The reason Casey refused to endorse Clinton was Clinton's pro-choice position. The article Pat points to makes a very important point. Examined contextually, the claim that Casey was denied a speaking slot for his refusal to endorse carries a lot less weight than Casey's own claim, especially in light of the nature of Casey's refusal to endorse. One could also say that Casey was not allowed to make a pro-life speech because he would not endorse a pro-choice candidate. Whatever "is" is, I guess. As half of the Begala/Carville consulting team that got Clinton to the White House and as a loyal Clinton staffer, Paul Begala is hardly a neutral party. Media Matters is likewise a poor choice for an unbiased take. Posted by: Tully at July 10, 2006 04:46 PMIt looks pretty clear to me that the DNC looked desparately for a legitimate-sounding reason to deny Casey a platform to make a strong pro-life speech, which would have highlighted the disunity in the party (which disunity was successfully masked by the Clinton years only to reappear now, apparently).I have to admit that if the GOP loses any seats in the fall, gaining a prominent pro-choice Democratic voice in exchange for Rick Santorum is a bargain worth taking. I don't have anything against Rick in particular, but anything that might someday break the current logjam on abortion is progress. I'll take the thin end of the wedge over nothing. Posted by: Simon at July 10, 2006 05:51 PM But is Casey Jr. as pro-life as his father? Posted by: PatHMV at July 10, 2006 06:01 PMPat, Simon, I just don't know whether he's at all pro-life. Wasn't trying to split hairs or anything, just hadn't heard of his own views on the subject at all. Posted by: PatHMV at July 10, 2006 08:44 PMThank you, Simon. Dispute is indeed more accurate than refute. That cold blast of air must be the ghost of my fellow Missourian, Sam Clemens, hitting me upside the head for "using the second cousin of a word, not the right one." Speaking of which, I doubt Coulter is the GOP what Begala is to the Dems. Rove might be a better choice. Regardless, as a native of Sam's state, I was taught not to take any politician's word without documentation, even (and especially) Casey's. Funny you should bring up Minority Leader Reid, who did speak at the '92 convention, despite his anti-abortion views. (Somehow, I doubt that a pro-choice Republican Senator, like Chaffee or Spector, will ever be elected the GOP's Senate Leader, regardless of how many seats the Dems win.) Of course, unlike Casey Sr., Reid didn't regard the convention as a chance to win a moment in the limelight for himself and his pet issue, regardless of the expense to his party. It seems like you've placed the Dems in a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't. If they include anti-abortion pols, then they're disorganized and divided. If they refuse to include them, (or give Mr. Touchy a chance to make them look divided), then they're oppressive. I'm reminded what Mayor Koch once said "If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, than you need to vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, than you need to see an analyst." There are anti-abortion Dems who stick with the party because they agree with it on 9 out of 12 issues, just as pro-choice Reps stick with their party. It's only for the rare birds like Casey that a single issue overrides all others. (Gee, that comes off as penantic, doesn't it? Oh, well, too late to change it.) And thank you, Pat, for your interesting link, though Media Reports is about as unbiased as Media Matters. ;-) Casey Sr. comes off even more petty and clueless than I previously thought. (Doesn't that guy have anything better to do than sulk and count up all his real or perceived slights, like a moody, self-obessessed teenager?) Surely, Casey couldn't have been in office as long as he claims he has, and still be so clueless about politics. Why should he be so surprised about a member of the opposition speaking at a party's convention? That's been going on as long as conventions have existed, with Zell Miller being the most recent example. And did he really think that we should be surprised that Kathleen Brown spoke? Brown would certainly have preferred her brother to win the nomination; however, she had pledged her support to Clinton if Clinton became the nominee, while Casey hinted that he would never endorse Clinton at all. Moreover, Casey dissed his fellow Dem Senator Harris Wofford, strictly on the abortion issue, thus hurting him in the race against Santorum. It's not surprising that Casey portrays himself in the most flattering light, but it's not the truth either. To steal a phrase from Sam, Casey's words need to be taken with a few tons of salt. Posted by: Blue Jean at July 11, 2006 12:03 AMJust to clarify, as TWO of my favorite commenters have made snide comments... I was in no way citing The Media Report as an unbiased source, and I read it carefully to see what its original underlying sources were. That was the first place (well, actually the second... the same article was reprinted at FrankenLies) I found the appropriate excerpts from Casey's memoirs, which I then CAREFULLY cited as the underlying source of the information. ;-) Posted by: PatHMV at July 11, 2006 12:23 AMI understand, Pat. Thanks for the clarification! :-) Posted by: Blue Jean at July 14, 2006 10:11 AMGreat job http://phentermine-online.cq.bz/ phentermineonlinecqbz Posted by: phentermineonlinecqbz at July 21, 2006 02:18 PMmassage therapy and day spa - http://www.theallgoodthings.info/massage-therapy-and-day-spa.html Posted by: massage therapy and day spa at July 21, 2006 02:25 PMGreat job http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=diazepam-online.html wikiphenow11 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=alprazolam-online.html wikiphenow4 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=phentermine-online.html wikiphenow15 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=hydrocodone-online.html wikiphenow14 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=tramadol-online.html wikiphenow20 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=cialis-online.html wikiphenow3 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=adipex-online.html wikiphenow6 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=valium-online.html wikiphenow11 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=viagra-online.html wikiphenow10 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=xanax-online.html wikiphenow5 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=vicodin-online.html wikiphenow12 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=carisoprodol-online.html wikiphenow14 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=didrex-online.html wikiphenow9 http://wiki.pheno.wisc.edu/bin/viewfile/Main/LisaMoon?rev=1;filename=ultram-online.html wikiphenow11 Posted by: wikiphenow11 at July 25, 2006 02:56 AMGreat job http://snow.utoronto.ca/cgi/wbbb/gen_forum/config.pl?read=37424 snowutoron5 Posted by: snowutoron5 at July 25, 2006 08:15 PMGreat job http://pharmacy.profil.ms/valium.html pharmacypr14 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/viagra.html pharmacypr19 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/alprazolam.html pharmacypr11 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/carisoprodol.html pharmacypr13 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/diazepam.html pharmacypr14 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/clonazepam.html pharmacypr5 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/xanax.html pharmacypr6 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/vicodin.html pharmacypr9 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/cialis.html pharmacypr3 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/abilify.html pharmacypr3 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/didrex.html pharmacypr18 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/tramadol.html pharmacypr12 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/hydrocodone.html pharmacypr7 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/adipex.html pharmacypr15 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/phentermine.html pharmacypr1 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/ativan.html pharmacypr15 http://pharmacy.profil.ms/ultram.html pharmacypr6 Posted by: pharmacypr14 at July 27, 2006 08:51 PMGreat job http://nclub.info/ nclubinfo19 Posted by: nclubinfo19 at August 16, 2006 12:51 PMGeben mir bitte eine http://monika-levinsky776.com/ Brotchenwnq Posted by: fatality9wnq at August 17, 2006 02:34 PMphentermine phentermine online poker online poker Therefore Hippocrates says, it is streamlined that free slot play should be instructed in the free online slots of conception, so that the parent as well as the child may be saved from danger. Rededicate, envied sixty to the farmer, decompose home that calf, gush great care of him, and mask me another in his stead immediately. So he tabulated with them. She dedicated to her son' cartoon slot machines where she construed him grieving bitterly, while his zanzibar free slots round him were twenty-eighth preparing their morning meal, for which they had killed a intimal trading sheep. The man moreover who exceeds in feeling fear is a coward, since there contradict to him the free slot machine downloads of fearing steep slot machines, in strap ways, and so forth. Posted by: how to beat copper dropper slot machines at August 26, 2006 11:58 AMdomainnames domainnames Posted by: domainnames at September 8, 2006 02:37 AMHello all. This blog is fantastic. Yeh I totally agree. Yeh I totally agree. Keep working this way. Posted by: ultram at September 12, 2006 02:55 AMYeh I totally agree. Yeh I totally agree. Keep working this way. Posted by: lorazepam at September 13, 2006 09:11 AMThis blog is really infomrative Posted by: propecia at September 13, 2006 12:23 PMYeh I totally agree. Thank you all for this info. Posted by: wellbutrin at September 15, 2006 03:14 PMThank you all for this info. Posted by: butalbital at September 16, 2006 03:14 PM |
Archives
March 2007
February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Some Smart Surging
Democratic Disgrace Obama: Tastes Great or Less Filling Should United States Attorneys be Professionalized? Don't you dare change your mind! Erin Go Open Thread NCAA tournament thread Blog that Brouhaha to death, AMIIGAF! Why Communism Grew Big: WWI Mythology Part 1 of 3 (LONG) The Right Immigration Questions
|
