Let it go. We're better than that.

[teach1st]

(I posted these sentiments in another thread, I but wanted to expand on it a little.)

OK, so a Democrat in office may have made a mistake. Just ignore it. There will be plenty more mistakes down the road. How we respond to mistakes is what is important. Ignore it.

Really. Just ignore it. It's over.

How do the Republicans get around all of their mistakes or misadventures or negative publicity? They ignore it. They don't bring it up. (And, yes, they avoid apologizing, but that's for another thread, because we're ignoring it.)

It goes away. Unless we keep responding. The more we respond, the more our reponses get responded to and the more we help perpetrate the right wing echo chamber. We've got to build our own echo chamber. And looking back creates a weak echo.

Look, we're got the polls on our side right now, DSM is exciting and needs pushed, as does all the dirt that seems to be spilling out of crevices. The CIA is contradicting the adminstration, and all we can do is revisit a mistake? We're better than that.

On the the DSM. On to the the CIA report about terrorist schooling in Iraq. Coingate and beyond! Attack! Attack! Don't look back.

[Jacobin]

1. When you supplicate yourself piteously before a vicious enemy

whimpering and whining and apologizing for speaking the truth,THEY aren't going to stop showing the soundbites of a cowering "democrat", now are they?

WE can try to forget it, but believe you me, they won't.

He's a Wanker

[KittyWampus]

3. You've Called Durbin An Idiot And Now He's A Wanker

and yet, you haven't told DU what you did to support him for the days leading up to his statement of regret.

Did you send money, emails to the mediawhores, letters to the editor, calls to Cspan or rightwing radio shows?

What?

IMO, the real wankers are the DU'ers who talk tough but do squat when it comes to ACTIVELY backing up our elected Democrats.

And ignore all the GOOD stuff they've done for the country.

Durbin has been a leading light in the Senate.

Yeah, who is the real wanker.

[Jacobin]

5. Gee, I didn't know he needed a nanny

in order to make a truthful statement on the senate floor. Should we go to D.C. and hold his hand while he crosses the street?

Does anyone sing him to sleep at night? I feel terrible for not rushing to his aid, to make certain that the appearance that he is a gutless wonder is even more obvious.

If we keep the bar this low for our senators, we are in for a great time.

Yes....Wanker and Idiot.

There are lots more, but it is just too obvious to even mention.

[Cocoa]

2. hear hear

but I wouldn't worry about it, the fuss from both sides will die down soon I predict.

[Rex]

4. Failure leads to success.

To bad the Dem leaders won't learn this lesson. It would be nice if they could get some PR managers to teach them about the 'appearance' of solidarity. :eyes:

[OneBlueSky]

6. let's particularly stop debating the merits and shortcomings of . . .

potential 2008 presidential candidates . . . it's a complete waste of time and energy, and is meaningless without real reform of the voting (and vote counting ) process . . . THAT's where the energy needs to be directed . . .

besides, the criteria for running for president could very well look a lot different two years from now . . . resentment of the war and the lies that led up to it may be SO bad by then that anyone who voted to support the war could well be an automatic loser . . . same for the New Freedom Initiative mindfuck, which by then should be a real barn burner . . .

further, by focusing these discussions on the perceived "front runners," we're pretty much limiting the pool to sitting senators and House members . . . neither of which will likely be strong candidates, given the low esteem in which Congress is held (and it will be even lower two years from now) . . .