Franken going DLC, I stopped listening, wrote him, you should too.

[ecoalex]

As a listener of AAR since it's start up, I have noticed Al Franken started moving to the right, and "doing a DLC dance".


Franken has become repug lite, a.k.a. a DLC candidate.

He is for the war in Iraq, "seeing it through" as is Lieberman, Dodd, Obama, Biden, etc, the traitors of the Democrats.

Franken Tuesday said that "Bush won the election by 3%"

To sum up Franken's stands, he's for the war in Iraq, to finish it out, and believes Bush won legitimately in 2000, 2004, the elections were very close, but Bush won.

Do you support Franken's stands? Is he clearly a DLC dem ? Do you support DLC dems?

[LisaM]

1. Over an ass like Norm Coleman?

Yes.

[Behind the Aegis]

2. I support Al!

[BlueEyedSon]

3. I'm done with him too, Thom Harmann everyday for me now

[Gold Metal Flake]

9. Thom is a Progressive!

If you are near a computer, stream him:

http://www.radiopower.org/progressivetalk.ram

http://www.thomhartmann.com

Tomorrow, Brunch with Bernie (Sanders). Always fantastic radio.

He's an Independant, like Bernie Sanders. I have to say, no offense to anyone here, but if Bernie and/or Thom start a political party, I will join.




.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

71. I've been done with Al now for months. I listen to Thom too. n/t

[HootieMcBoob]

80. I like Al's show but recently I've been listening to WPTT occasionally

They have Lynn Cullen from 9 to Noon and Thom Hartman from Noon to 3pm. It's good to have a change from Springer and Franken every now and then even though I appreciate the work that both of them do.

Here's the link to WPTT in Pittsburgh, PA you can stream the shows from the website: http://www.1360wptt.com/schedule/

[sarahlee]

227. Me three n/t

[ClassWarrior]

4. On the other hand, the radio network he helped start brings...

...Mike Malloy, Randi Rhodes, Janeane + Sam, Laura Flanders, Rachel Maddow, Bobby + Pap, Chuck D, and many other true Progressives right into our homes on a daily basis.

Wow, life's a trade-off?? Who'da thunk?? :shrug:

NGU.

[BlueEyedSon]

14. He did not help start it, he's an employee

[ClassWarrior]

15. Wrong.

NGU.

[BlueEyedSon]

23. Name that tune.

(post a link)

[ClassWarrior]

32. Not worth it. If you're really that interested, go look it up yourself.

NGU.

[BlueEyedSon]

35. I did (wikipedia, etc). No Franken.

I also saw "Left of the Dial". I'm pretty sure I was paying attention and No Franken.

Thanks anyway

[ClassWarrior]

42. Wow. A big two-minute search. Glad you're thorough.

12:32 p.m. - 12:34 p.m.

NGU.

[BlueEyedSon]

43. Yeah I watched a 90 minute documentary too

what is your problem?

[DistressedAmerican]

157. You Are Dead Wrong On This Point. He Was A Founder At AAR

Watch it again.. You missed something.

[rinsd]

65. You're weren't paying enough attention then....

Franken was all over Left of the Dial, from the first promotions and articles about the launching to the first broadcast, to discussion about the problems with money to the election day broadcasts.

They even show how Randi who was the only real radio person was pissed at all the attention Al and Janeane were getting while she got very little.

Plus I would add that in my opionion, his Liars book (building on Rush is a Big Fat Idiot) and subsequent public fights with O'Reilly set the stage for AAR to become a reality.

On Edit: Also let's not forget that one of the major swings in the balance was the conversion of Howard Stern whcih he attributed to Al's book.

I feel Al's book (and its influence) changed more minds about Bush and the right than almost anything that has come out in the last 5 years, possibly even more so than F 9-11.

[sniffa]

178. thank you

that book, is what Lit the fire under me... and for that, i'm thankfuL.

[Eric J in MN]

105. It's semantics. "Air America" wasn't his idea, but he is the most

famous person on the station, and they probably would have gone off the air a few months after they started without him.

His show was the first one they broadcast, and that wasn't by coincidence.

[LittleClarkie]

121. An employee who's name recognition helped the station

He was a name when they needed a name. An author with a good point of view. And I'd rather hear what his stances are and decide for myself rather than going with someone else's opinion of what he is, if you don't mind.

Rather like a smear, putting a DLC label on someone who isn't on the DLC list and doesn't identify themselves that way, knowing the emotional baggage that comes with that label.

[IrateCitizen]

5. I've barely listened to him, and he's always been a DLCer...

Franken has always been a centrist Democrat. That's yesterday's news.

I don't listen to him for several reasons:
1. I don't like partisan talk radio, whether it is left OR right.
2. I don't pick up WLIB from my office.
3. His television skits are way funnier than his radio shtick.

[rinsd]

82. *chuckle*

"His television skits are way funnier than his radio shtick."

You just made me think of his "wholly self contained news crew" bits from Weekend Update on SNL.

[Cooley Hurd]

112. Yes! And his Halloween newscast from Houdini's grave!!!

...circa 1977! Classic! :rofl:

[IrateCitizen]

137. "How are you holdin' up out there, Al?"

"The weight of the satellite has actually compressed several of my lower vertebrae, and I'm in excrutiating pain."

"Is it worth it?"

"Absolutely!"


Yes, those skits were classic -- back in the good old days when SNL was actually funny! I also loved his parody of Pat Robertson in the 1988 Republican Presidential Debates.

[wtmusic]

6. "Finishing the war out" is an interesting concept

kind of like how we finished Vietnam out. Let 40,000 more Americans and countless Vietnamese die, before we "withdraw with honor".

No thanks.

[JDPriestly]

27. I believe Franken has children of enlistment age.

If he believes in seeing the war out, let's encourage him to talk to his children about enlisting. Let's see if he is so enthusiastic about seeing the war out once his kids are over there. I know he visits the troops a lot and is very sympathetic to them, but I suspect his views would change if his son or daughter's life were on the line.

I've noticed that he is inviting all these extreme right wing people to his show. It is just disgusting. I can't listen to it. It would be OK if he really challenged them. But, he sort beats them with a verbal wet noodle and then giggles about it. It's disgusting. What happened to the Al Franken we loved? He used to challenge and stand for something. Where has our friend gone?

[K-W]

33. But that isnt Frankens position.

Franken supports a structured withdrawl along with an ACTUAL plan to hand over power and stabilize the country.

He doesnt support continuing Bush's war or finishing anything. He just thinks if we stay a little longer, and change our policy, we could make it more likely that Iraq will survive our leaving.

I dont agree with him, but Im not going to smear him by casting him as some hawk.

[LoZoccolo]

7. He's always been a DLC Democrat. So?

He said this plainly and explicitly at that convention where he got in the row with O'Reilly. The problem is that people have a warped perception of the DLC. He was confronting the Republicans the whole time; people don't expect that from a DLC Democrat when they should.

[IrateCitizen]

12. Actually, I expect it from much of the DLC rank-and-file...

The problem is that such attacks of Republicans get lost amidst the repeated assaults by the likes of Will Marshall and Al From on their left flank.

[Zhade]

95. Well, that's to be expected from Will "PNAC tastes great!" Marshall.

Fucking scumbag PNAC-lover that he is.

[mzmolly]

217. Al is not a Zell Miller DINO, he's a member of the DLC. Big whoop!

Give me the days of DLC - Clinton over this frikken mess any damn day.

Al Franken is a PLUS to our collective cause, he's got a great radio show, and I'm glad as hell he's on our side.

:hi:

[earth mom]

8. I'm not surprised...

I could smell it or sense it miles away.

Of course tell that to the guy who argued with me about how great Franken last week on another thread. :eyes:

[patrioticliberal]

10. Listen to Thom Hartmann online if you can

He's on at the same time, very progressive, much more inteligent and informed. He writes a lot of things at CommonDreams, I believe.

[tx_dem41]

11. Thank you for this astute analysis.

Minority party status forever!

[KittyWampus]

53. honestly, some DU'ers spout "DLC" like it's a syndrome or something

over and over... it's their freaking boogieman.

[ronnykmarshall]

63. Time for one of these ......

[xxqqqzme]

93. U always put that picture in

@ exactly the right time - I love it. Always makes me laugh & I couldn't agree more.

[ronnykmarshall]

106. This one too ....... when it's Nancy Grace

[XanaDUer]

214. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:rofl:

There she is like a dragon with her nostrils of justice flaming!

[AlCzervik]

13. i don't listen to Al but i don't remember him ever saying he was

a huge liberal. I think Al has always been a DLC guy and i think he's probably been pretty honest about it.

[ecoalex]

31. Get along, and selling out to the corporations is the problem

He says he's for universal health care, when he really can't be, it's so no no with the corporations.We'll see more of the likes of those who sell out working people, and the low income Americans.

I won't vote for a DLC dem, Green, other, not DLC

Until we have honest elections , it's a waste of time voting nationally, I'll only vote State elections, we're ok in Ca.

Franken clearly accepts the elections of 2000 , 2004 , I even have seen Hackett may have won Ohio, Diebold tabulators got it done for the repug , again.

[K-W]

36. So now you are calling him a liar?

Franken does support universal health care. Sheesh.

"Franken clearly accepts the elections of 2000 "

Bullshit. He thinks it was stolen.

[Talismom]

16. Both Al and Jerry Springer get on my nerves, but I look at it this way...

I've heard an awful lot of people who either voted repuke or were pretty uninvolved in politics call in to Jerry or comment about Al and say that they are comfortable listening, have learned a lot and will definitely vote dem next time. So, I guess they serve their purpose, even if they're not my cup of tea.

I, on the other hand, LOVE MIKE MALLOY!!!!

[lancdem]

17. He thinks Bush won legitimitely in 2000?

Are you sure?

[Cocoa]

57. I seriously doubt it

I hope we'll be getting a link...

[K-W]

64. Heres a link, and its fun because its a Franken bashing site.

http://www.frankenlies.com/florida.htm

[Dr Fate]

18. If true- I'd love to see more Al O'Frankens in the DLC. God Bless him.

Al takes team Bush to task everyday- he itemizes their lies & calls them on their BS- and always backs it up solidly. Al also documents media bias.

I'd love to see more DLCers act like Al and repeat his talking points.

Al & his station is a blessing-I dont mind some of his more moderate stances-he is balanced out by Malloy & Randi.

If Al is DLC, then their is hope for them yet!

GOD BLESS AL O'FRANKEN!!!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

19. Obama is a traitor?

Jesus, you DO want to lose.

[LoZoccolo]

29. Ha ha ha ha was this from another thread?

I've seen people come down on Obama with a hair-trigger impulse for like, one thing he said on one of the Sunday morning shows. It's funny...people who don't get out of the house much and actually do things for the Democrats seem to view complaining on a message board as their own recourse for anything they disagree with, and since even that really doesn't do much, they have to get extreme and severe to feel like it's effective any.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

111. Obama's the best thing our party has seen in years.

The guy knows how to speak. He knows how to get his point across. He appeals to a broad spectrum of the population. He's intelligent, yet not a wanker. The dude knows his shit. He knows how to win.

[K-W]

20. Your accusations are unfounded and repugnant.

He hasnt moved right in the slightest nor is he even close to the DLC ideologically. If you dont think Al is progressive enough, then you probably dont think 70% of DU is progressive enough.

Being wrong about the facts of an election (and you are wrong, he thinks 2000 was stolen) isnt an ideological issue in the slightest, and his support for limited occupation while totally wrong is in line with what his ideology has always been.

This is devisive dualism at its ugliest. Anyone who doesnt agree with me on everything or doesnt get every issue right is a conservative DLC democrat... that is essentially your argument.

[Lex]

21. I support Dems who are more centrist than me

and I'm glad we have many choices for Dems to listen to on the radio now, and not just screaming assholes like Rush.

[w13rd0]

22. Al has always been a DLC Democrat...

...and hasn't ever concealed that. That fact, along with my not really liking his humor, is why I don't listen to him. But some do, and that's fine too. We can't bitch about the GOP being controlled by it's "wing" and silencing the moderates in their party while doing the same thing ourselves. There are centrist and corporatist Democrats out there. There are gay Republicans. It's a wild, wacky world we live in.

[KittyWampus]

54. Oh, You Know He's A Member Of The DLC? Or He Actively Fundraises For It?

what the fuck does 'he's "DLC"' mean anyway?

DLC essentially seems to be DU shorthand for not completely as far to the Left as SOME of the posters on this site.

If there's even ONE issue a Democrat doesn't come out in agreement with the DU partyline, their a "DLC'er".

I really wish some DU'ers would realize how infantile their spouting "DLC" constantly makes them seem.

[w13rd0]

110. Haha, that's funny...

...I was defending him you do realize. He has said, in interviews and on the air, that he tends to agree more with the positions of centrist Democrats, and he usually names off those that are in the DLC. Seeing as he isn't an elected official, he isn't IN the DLC. Why, is saying someone is a "DLC Democrat" an insult to you? There are some "DLC Democrats" I like, and there are some "left-wing" Democrats I don't. Why do you have a problem with Al Franken being a centrist?

[Pepperbelly]

118. self delete

[Inland]

24. It seems you never listened to him

or you would know some pretty good stuff from the show, and wouldn't have to mischaracterize his positions.

[Rainscents]

25. I stop listening to him soooooo long ago.

He really annoy the shit out me. He talk too much about, O'lielly, Rush, and that stupid YoYo shit.

[Behind the Aegis]

47. It's Oy Yoy Yoy!

It is a 2 minute skit based in Jewish humor. As for his talk about Rush and others, it his pointing out their deceptions, which is a good way to plan our strategies if we know how the other side 'thinks.' Glad you stopped listening.

[hippiegranny]

26. While Al's centrist tendencies

can be annoying at times, he is still a good spokesperson for the left in most cases. I refuse to take part in eating our own.

[Lex]

39. Well stated, hippiegranny.

I agree wholeheartedly.

[K-W]

40. And he is a progressive.

He's just niave on some issues, ignorant on others, and is wrong alot. It doesnt change his underlying convictions which are progressive and liberal.

[Cleita]

28. Franken has always be left of the dial on some issues.

However, he favors a single payer universal health care system, which does not make him DLC. The DLC wants to improve the system we have, insurance and HMO's because they favor corporations. A single payer universal system would replace for profit health insurance and HMO's.

Also, on his stance on the elections, I think he is saying Bush won because that's what we have now and no one challenged him really. Both Gore and Kerry stepped down and acknowledged Bush as the winner. So that kind of makes him the winner, doesn't it? Franken also said that we need to change our whole election system with a paper trail so that there is no doubt in the future as to who really won.

Leaving Iraq in a way that doesn't make things worse, means we have to stay until we can get an exit plan and a date to leave. Many Democrats feel that we have the responsiblity to end this honorably. If we pull out right now and leave, everyone who died there really would have died in vain while the country collapses into civil, religious war and maybe a new cruel dictator will rise out of this to take Saddam's place. It puts us back at square one.

I also like the fact that he challenges the liars, Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reilly. He always tries to bring out the truth in matters they try to propagandize, so yes, he's not a raving Socialist Democrat like me or maybe even like you but he's not DLC IMHO.

[izzie]

30. Well I think Bush won with the college and how it was counted

I frank;y think it should be changed and go with Population and that means Bush would have lost in 2000 and I believe won in 2004.But you can hardly go back on this. I just look at it as a the court gave it to Bush is an odd out come. And no one will change it as it is so in tight with money. The war. Many people say we can not leave as they said in Vietnam but I say leave before we have to many more killed. Are we going to try for another wall? But a lot of people feel we stay a little bet longer and it will work out. Heck they are still saying we should have stayed longer in Nam. Now maybe they are right but I just do not believe it. I still find it hard to find the reason of the day why we are their but for this OIL and we sure have made a mess of that. The people living on top of it can not even get it. How much is sent out of the country each day? Can that be found out? Who is getting the money for that? May be you are even more liberal than I am?

[quisp]

34. woo boy! these "I hate Al Franken" threads are getting

kind of tedious.

I don't agree with everything Al Franken says.

I don't disagree with everything Rush the pigboy says.

I am very grateful that Al is on the air and is framing the discussion in a manner much more friendly to liberals and progressives.

I just have to ask, are you shopping your demo tapes around to radio stations to replace Al? Or maybe you could link us to your podcast.

It's not as easy as it sounds, so cut him a little slack

[ecoalex]

46. The repugs win with closed ranks; we lose because of the schism DNC/DLC

Obama voted for the bankruptsy bill, and another bill that was the trade mark of the DLC vrs DNC votes. Voting the corporates will, and against working , poor is not what the Dems do, I thought.Maybe I need to look for another party?

[K-W]

48. Ignore mispost

[emulatorloo]

37. enough with the bs circular firing squad crap

[jean]

38. give it a rest. Al Franken is a fantastic Democrat who gives his all

Al devotes himself - intellectually, creatively and probably with a ton of his own money - to the Democratic Party.

He is the penultimate truth seeker - didya notice he backs up every word out of his mouth and in his books with in depth, quality research? He is cautious about issues until he researches them, doesn't shoot from the hip. (hmm, imagine Al in a cowboy outfit)

He is a great Democrat and we're lucky to have him.

[sandnsea]

41. Hackett is for "seeing it through" in Iraq too

Woolsey's resolution calls for a roadmap for Iraq by the end of 2005, and troop withdrawal to begin in 2006. After Iraq is secure with a government in place. I don't think any politician truly supports immediate withdrawal in Iraq. I wish they'd stop saying it if they don't mean it.

[tx_dem41]

44. Does Democrat taste good?

I figure some of you should know, since you love to eat your own.

[mtnester]

45. Really, sometimes Franken is PART of the problem

I want to throttle him when he does this.

[ecoalex]

55. Is it naive to want a progressive Dem party?

Is it naive to want a party that is for working people ? A party that works for them, and fights for them?

I don't see the present Democratic party doing this . Silent most of the time, not being the opposition party.

They rolled over on many critical bills.

Why no CAFE standards? Energy Conservation improved?

The Dems are Repug lite for now, this does noone any good except them to get reelected, lot's 'o corporate $$ pours in when you don't oppose them.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

58. It is niave...

to expect that every Democrat and every liberal will toe your particular party line. You disagree with Franken on some issues. Good for you -- you're thinking independently.

But then you basically post that we should all stop listening to Al Franken because he doesn't think the way you do. So we're all supposed to stop thinking independently so that you'll never have a Democrat who disagrees with you?

Are you fucking insane?

Do you think we're ever going to win an election when schism and splinter groups withhold their support from this candidate or the other because they don't pass their personal purity test? Al Franken isn't perfect -- and he would be the first to admit it -- but he's a damned sight better than the other guys.

[K-W]

66. Al Franken is a progressive.

Not the most progressive, or best progressive, but a progressive just the same.

[geek tragedy]

49. "Traitors of the Democrats?" Idiotic thinking like that is why we lose

elections.

THERE ARE NO PERFECT DEMOCRATS.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

50. I don't always agree with him -- but he's done some very valuable work

for Democrats and progressives, and getting AAR started is just one of them. Even though sometimes I think he's either too silly (the Oy Oy Show comes to mind; that's just dumb), or too "centrist," I'll always like Al for what he did after Paul Wellstone was killed. The weekend before the 2002 election, right after Walter Mondale agreed to run in Wellstone's place, a bunch of us volunteers were working frantically in a dumpy little office, putting lists together and phone banking, Al showed up to help and support us. He was really great, really passionate about what Wellstone stood for, and after hearing him speak privately I think he's for real and not a DLC-type sellout. I hope he runs against that douchebag Coleman in '08, and I'll happily support him if he does.

[Behind the Aegis]

51. Some good points.

I will say that the "Oy Yoy Yoy" show is Jewish humor. Some find it stupid or 'don't get it.' But, I think it is nothing more than an extension of his interesting personality. There have been times when he has done the "Oy Yoy Yoy" show and my partner, not Jewish, doesn't get it and I have to explain it. He still doesn't find it funny, but that is OK. Ethnic humor is not for everyone. I wish they would play it more on "Sundance," though!

[Pirate Smile]

52. I support Al. So he criticized the NARAL ad today. It is getting

slammed by the fact check organizations as being misleading and inaccurate. He won't lie and distort reality. He has made that perfectly clear.

If he was in the Senate, he said he would vote against Roberts but probably wouldn't be for a Filibuster unless some new info came up.

That actually doesn't sound that crazy.

I don't agree with everything he says but I don't expect to.

He tends to be liberal on some issues and more moderate on others. If you want to start writing off those types of people, we will never win anything.

[union_maid]

114. I thought the NARAL ad was awful, even if correct

It makes them sound nuts and extremist. They're not. There are good reasons to take their position, but it doesn't come across in the ad. I don't know what Franken said, but I'd criticize that ad, too.

I understand the frustration with moderate positions. I get frustrated, too, but I do agree that we'd do well to be more tolerant. Probably including me, sometimes. The official DLC positions on trade and similar issues really are unacceptable, but not even all members of the DLC take those positions.

We do have to hang together or we'll hang separately and it's good to keep that in mind. Does a person oppose the Bush regime and the right wing? That should be litmus test enough for the moment. Franken certainly does both those things.

[Pirate Smile]

123. Good points and I agree with all of them.

I think that ad was a mistake too.

[Pirate Smile]

126. Even The Daily Show is cutting that ad to pieces as being "misleading".

Franken would have looked like an idiot if he would have tried to justify it.

NARAL screwed up, not Franken.

[Lars39]

209. Bottom line...is he critizing Roberts more than the Naral ad?

If he's focusing on the Naral's ad more than Robert's record, something's wrong.

[Cocoa]

56. I don't believe Franken said he thought 2000 was legit

I think you made that up, until you provide a transcript.

[ecoalex]

59. I don't have anything on 2000, but he accepts 2004 I heard that

I don't accept both elections, so he accepts one, many don't, and the facts prove it, yet he accepts it, why? This is what I am bringing up.
We need an opposition party to represent us where is it?

Just a few people like Conyers, Boxer doesn't amount to an opposition.

Who speaks with force for us? The Point.

[Cocoa]

60. then don't say he said it

simple as that. Criticize him for what he said, don't embellish it.

[tx_dem41]

62. You "don't have anything on 2000"?

Yet, you said Franken "believes Bush won legitimately in 2000, 2004,"

So...that was just a lie on your part? Isn't that what * does?

[K-W]

69. That is ludacris.

Whether or not Al thinks the election was legitimate or not has nothing whatsoever to do with either his ideology or his willingess to fight.

In fact Al has proven time and time again that he is a liberal and on the left side of the democratic spectrum. He has also proven time and time again that he is a fighter and has no problem being the opposition.

The idea that someone must be perfect to be a liberal is absurd.

[Eric J in MN]

100. Al Franken doesn't consider the 2000 election legitimate.

He personally remarked to Katherine Harris about purging black voters.

He also went to Florida during the 2000 re-count and spoke to a black woman who brought her daughter with her to watch her vote, but wasn't allowed to since she had falsely been labelled a suspected felon.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

61. Yes, I support Franken

I don't agree with everything he says. I don't agree with everything Randi, Janeane or Mike Malloy say. So what? I am glad they are on the air providing a full spectrum of Democratic and progressive views.

These Franken-bashing threads get so old. When I don't like what Al has to say I turn him off and go do something else. You should too.

[Douglas Carpenter]

67. Mr. Franken

States constantly that we were lied into the war in Iraq. Although I don't agree with his current position. But, frankly a lot of people are uncertain about how to get out of this mess

Stated clearly that there was a lot of improper activity in the 2004 election. Feels strongly that 2000 was stolen. Strongly supports a paper trail for all balloting.

Supports single-payer universal health care

Campaigns for Bernie Sanders

Opposes Wal-Mart at every opportunity

Opposed CAFTA and "Bankruptcy Reform"

Calls himself a McGovern Democrat

Feels political adds should be factually-based and honest

Granted he is certainly to the right of me on some issues. However this does not sound like a DLC DINO to me

_______________________________


_______________________________________________________


A True Voice of Opposition
--A Voice for Working People
--Not the Elite--
http://www.bernie.org/issues.asp

Who is Congressman Bernie Sanders?

Read this article and watch the short video clips:

http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/04/who-is-bernie-sanders.html

[K-W]

70. Dont forget Paul Wellstone,

hardly a DINO and a personal hero of Al's.

[Douglas Carpenter]

72. you are right--we should never forget Paul Wellstone

Al's hero--and hardly a DINO

_______________________




http://www.iwtnews.com/

[BigBearJohn]

68. GIVE RANDI RHODES HIS SPOT. SHE SPEAKS FOR ME!!!

[Cleita]

81. They like Randi where she is because she reaches

a larger audience with the commuters going home from work. You know the people who don't have a chance to listen to her at work.

[K-W]

83. Yep, rush hour is prime time for the radio. EOM

[DarienComp]

73. Let's be clear

First of all, Franken never said he believes Bush won legitimately in 2000. Second, according to the national vote count, Bush did win by 3% whether there was fraud in Ohio or not. (I happen to believe there was.)

It's unfair to make this blanket statement that Franken is "for the war in Iraq". Franken did support going in at first, but now knows that the rationale for going in was based on lies and has said it numerous times on his show. He's certainly not for permanent military bases like Lieberman, which is the goal of the neo-cons.

Just because he takes a complicated position regarding a complicated problem doesn't mean he's DLC.

[K-W]

74. Franken did NOT support the invasion of Iraq.

He supported the invasion of Afghanistan only.

[Behind the Aegis]

75. Actually he did, at first.

He just said this the other day (on Sundance). He said he supported it because he believed Colin Powell. Had it not been for Powell, he would have never supported it because he doesn't trust Shrub, but had respect for Powell (since lost). He believes, were all lied to by the government. He no longer supports the invasion of Iraq, but feels an immediate withdrawal would be disastrous (more so than what is happening), and I agree with that assessment.

[K-W]

76. Did he support the Bush invasion when it happened?

Sorry if I got his stance wrong, I thought he was against the invasion.

[Behind the Aegis]

77. Yes, but unlike Shrub...Al admits he was wrong!

Al has spoken about it a few times and says how he is "embarrassed" that he was so naive. I think it (for Al anyway) hinged on Powell's speech at the UN. He admired Powell and thought he was being truthful. Al now sees the error (as have many) and admits we were lied to as a people.

On edit: Al says it was the WMD stuff...he never bought the "9-11" connection.

[K-W]

79. Thanks. EOM

[Zhade]

97. Believing Powell was his first mistake.

I mean, anyone who purports to be knowledgeable about politics and the history of this country ought to know how Powell got his start by aiding in the cover-up of My Lai.

[MattSWin]

103. Powell didn't exactly cover it up...

He just reported the "evidence" the US military let the investigation see. Half of Powell's problem with this was the fact he was African-American and an officer in the military.

Are you saying this didn't factor into his willingness to dive head first into such a potential military scandal?

[bluestateguy]

78. I'm not certain that he is DLC, but even if he is, I support him

Air America can have one DLCish host. Just one. We are a big tent party, and the hosts of Air America should reflect all wings of the party.

[kohodog]

84. dupe

[K-W]

86. guessed wrong nt

[kohodog]

88. He's always been moderate, I know

He just seems to be more so now. I don't listen to him all that much, but his guests lately have been hard to take and he agrees with them. Recently he had some kid talking about the WMD in Iraq and Franken never countewred with as much as "But there are none." So maybe he is the same, but the show is much more conservative lately.

[K-W]

90. No, he hasnt always been moderate, he has always been him.

Al is a fairly liberal guy who tries to speak to as wide an audience as possible and he often trips over himself trying to be fair to conservatives. That has always been the case, and he has from day one brought on conservatives and given them an easy time. It has nothing to do with his ideology and everything to do with his personality.

As far as the kid, i didnt hear that, but he certainly hasnt changed his tune about Iraq or WMD's. Considering his audience and how much he has discussed the issue I really doubt it matters that he let it slip by once.

How is the show more conservative? He has always had conservative guests, he has always skirted some issues that he shouldnt have. Al is far from perfect, but this narrative that he is becoming some scheming moderate to run for office is fantasy.

[kohodog]

102. It's harder for me to listen to lately, so I don't as much.

That being said, he's better than most, and I am in no way comparing him to the wack jobs on the right or even a guy like Doug Stephan. Look it's easy to criticise anyone and I'm not trying to slam Al. I think you summed it up well: "Al is a fairly liberal guy."

My perception is that his show is more moderate lately. You see it differently. At least he still plays the Dead.

peace

[K-W]

107. I will be happy when Al is off the air and in congress.

He will turn from one of the least energizing radio hosts into one of the more energizing congressmen.

[kohodog]

85. Franken wants to run for the senate

I think in 08 (not this year), and has tempered his views even more. He should learn from Paul Hackett and confront the neocons head on. I have no use for the Hillary's, Biden's, Kerry's etc., who will continue following the current path with minor modifications. The country needs to change course and the DLCers do not represent real change. We need to throw the lobbyists out of DC, but the DLC is drinking from the trough.

edit: sp

[K-W]

87. Name one view he has tempered. EOM

[MattSWin]

96. We're not going to do anything...

If we don't win more elections.

[MattSWin]

89. Aren't Bill and Hillary Clinton also arguably DLC

Democrats. Even Howard Dean is a DLC Dem on many issues. Sorry but people like Kucinich and Nader are exactly who the right-wing wants to represent the Democratic party.

If Democrats are represented by the farthest left people you can find the GOP can officially divert attention from how far right they've drifted.

Not being extremely far left doesn't mean rolling over or becoming more conservative. It means expressing progressive ideas in a way that doesn't allow the GOP to claim to be the party of average Americans.

We really need to stop and wonder why so many people vote against their interests and for the GOP.

[K-W]

92. it is the exact opposite really.

The last thing in the world the GOP wants is populist Democrats. The right didnt spend decades marginalizing populist economics and villianizing the activist left for nothing.

What is now considered the extreme left was once the heart of the Democratic party.

[MattSWin]

94. Only economic populism....

Which ignores the fact we're in an age of postmaterialism where people care more about issues like environment, guns, moral issues, etc.

The GOP wouldn't care if the Dems became economic populists because they pretty much never talk about fiscal issues and still do well with "red state" voters.

Secondly the GOP already have voters convinced that they're the real economic populists, getting govt. off the people's back, etc.

The old Democratic populism is what the right-wing calls big government so if we go back to that the GOP will just say they were right.

[K-W]

109. postmaterialism? lol, right.

Which ignores the fact we're in an age of postmaterialism where people care more about issues like environment, guns, moral issues, etc.

That isnt even close to true, and, btw the environment is very much an economic issue.


The GOP wouldn't care if the Dems became economic populists because they pretty much never talk about fiscal issues and still do well with "red state" voters.

Yah the GOP never talks about lowering taxes, fiscal responsibility, or anything like that.

Secondly the GOP already have voters convinced that they're the real economic populists, getting govt. off the people's back, etc.

Maybe we could try that convincing thing those republicans seem to have used to change voters minds instead of conceding defeat.

The old Democratic populism is what the right-wing calls big government so if we go back to that the GOP will just say they were right.

Yes, that old economic thing is what the GOP has inacccurately called big government.

Do you know why conservatives bought up media establishments and setup thinktanks and right wing activist groups? Because the democrats and thier populist economics were massively popular. So they turned to propaganda and villianized and marginalized the left.

[MattSWin]

129. I disagree...

Economic populism is pretty much a dead issue. Clinton got record numbers of support and was not running on what you're defining as economic populism.

By postmaterialism I mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmaterialism

The only economic populist idea I can think of is trade protectionism and basically I don't think by becoming trade protectionists the Democratic party is going to win back working class red state voters.

The political environment has moved beyond materialism. That's how Republicans get these people to support economic policies that don't benefit them by phrasing it in moral terms.

The GOP talks about economics but in moral terms.

By the way Clinton used the term big government too. So it's not just a right-wing slam. We can use the voters dislike of big government against Republicans.

[K-W]

140. Indeed you do.

Economic populism is pretty much a dead issue.
No it isnt. It is a dead issue for democrats because of decades of red baiting turned liberal baiting. The right uses economic populism non-stop, but they use it to sell policies that actually hurt workers economically. Tax reform, beurocratic reform, free market economics, etc. all are sold as strategies for a populist economic boom even though they are actually handouts to the rich. The republicans claimed they repealed the estate tax to help family farmers for chrissake.

Real economic populism is not doing so well, certainly, because the fake economic populists control the media and have convinced republicans and democrats alike that real economic populism is just a bunch of radical hooey while the conservative brand of economics is going to lift all the boats.

Clinton got record numbers of support and was not running on what you're defining as economic populism.

Record numbers of support? Are you joking?

I havent defined economic populism, so Im not sure what you are referring to, but no, you are wrong. Clinton did of course run as an economic populist. You do realize that pretty much all politicians pretend to be economic populists, right?

By postmaterialism I mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmaterialism
Yah, philosophy is lots of fun, but here in the real world, people are still people.

The only economic populist idea I can think of is trade protectionism and basically I don't think by becoming trade protectionists the Democratic party is going to win back working class red state voters.

Since you obviously have no clue what economic populism is, I find it odd you have such strong opinions about it. No, trade protectionism is not economic populism, and Bush and the republicans already have the market cornered on protectionism anyway.

Economic populism is supporting economic policies that serve the needs of the people.

The political environment has moved beyond materialism. That's how Republicans get these people to support economic policies that don't benefit them by phrasing it in moral terms.

I dont know what your obsession is with materialism, but the political environment hasnt moved anywhere. Republicans get these people to support economic policies by lying to them. They dont phrase it in moral terms. Cafta wasnt phrased in moral terms, it was phrased as something that would materially help americans. Tax cuts arent phrased in moral terms, they are phrased as giving money to Americans.

There is a shred to truth to what you are saying and that shred is that since there is such a limited range of economic opinions in the two major parties, there are no big economic issues up for debate. This leaves people with the impression that they either have no choices or that there is a consensus on those issues, so they turn to other issues to decide who to vote for.

If you think you will have basically the same quality of living under Dems as under Republicans, which many people do, you will of course not focus on economic issues when voting. That doesnt mean economics arent important to them, just that the rhetoric from both parties sounds pretty similar.

The GOP talks about economics but in moral terms.

No it talks about economics primarily in economic terms, but sometimes in moral terms.

By the way Clinton used the term big government too. So it's not just a right-wing slam. We can use the voters dislike of big government against Republicans.

Lol, the fact that Clinton used the right wing slam doesnt make it any less a right wing slam. Big government is a propaganda term that is designed to villianize the public sphere to increase the power of the private sphere.

It is fake populism. It appeals to peoples suspicion of centralized power, not to descentralize the power but to centralize it in the hands of unelected wealth.

Basically your overall argument is that the conservative economic frame is correct and the Democrats should work within it. Im sorry but the conservative economic frame is propaganda and real democrats should work to defeat it.

[MattSWin]

149. The problem I guess is we're not defining

Economic populism. How are you defining it?


Let me rephrase what I'm saying.

The Republicans don't frame economic issues as economic issues, they phrase them in moral terms. That's how they get people to support economic policies that don't benefit them.

I'm not saying we should move right on economics, I'm saying we should phrase our economic policies in moral terms.

[K-W]

152. OK

www.dictionary.com
pop·u·lism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ppy-lzm)
n.

A political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against the privileged elite.
B The movement organized around this philosophy.

The Republicans don't frame economic issues as economic issues, they phrase them in moral terms. That's how they get people to support economic policies that don't benefit them.

That isnt even remotely true. The republicans frame economic issues as economic issues. They sell tax cuts as giving working people more money. They sell cafta as free market reform that will stimulate the economy. They sell thier policies as the right way to create jobs. They sell social security reform as the only way to protect benefits.

They do sell economic issues in economic terms, all the time. I really cant see where you are coming from here.

[MattSWin]

154. I'm not sure....

You do have a point with the job creation issue but that doesn't explain why working class people vote Republican if they're concerned about economics.

[Bison William]

91. I am new and you can flame me but

I have never felt that FRanken's heart was totally into what he was doing. I think there was still a part of him that wanted to be a comic and he thought he could balance the two. Maybe he will figure it out and decide which way he wants to go. I personally hope he comes back to the fold because we need people like him, but we need 100% of them. Just my opinion

[brentspeak]

98. I support him and not your divisiveness (n/t)

[DELUSIONAL]

99. I stopped listening to him -- he's a wind bag

[iconoclastNYC]

101. At the ballot box it depends on who's running against them

I'll only give money to Democrats that serve as a proper role model for those who come after them. That does not include DLC sycophants.

[hyphenate]

104. I don't think so

The show's been on the air long enough now that the positions of many are pretty clear, and Al Franken is not abandoning the liberals. He might, however, be finding that a solitary road is not always the only road, and that if we are to survive as a nation, survive as a people, and survive as worthwhile human beings, that we must find a middle road that can be traveled by many.

It's not a move "to the right"--it's a road that can cross the spectrum--a road that can embrace various beliefs and philosophies without catering to a specific faction.

The true Democratic spirit runs through many people. Our party is a testimony to the wide and diverse social levels which inhabit this country. As liberals, we care for many, we believe in everyone's rights, and we have compassion for those who are tread upon.

This doesn't mean that those who are closer to the middle are wrong or misguided, or are in any way less than worthy of our wishes and best intentions. If we look at a percentage of all people in our country, we will see decent human beings, regardless of which side they purport to be on. It is only those who are blinded by intolerance, by money and greed, and by the desire to hold their beliefs over the rest of the people in our country that are bad and evil, and unfortunately, it is this faction that now resides in the white house.

What does this mean? It means that an extreme, greedy and powerful lobby has usurped our country and is using the mainstream media, which they largely own, to serve their own notorious needs, wants and desires. It means that 75% of the conservatives in our country are being controlled by the other 25% who hold sway over all public opinion and make it look like they are the majority. It means that any utterance from their mouths are able to manipulate and twist the truth to make it appear to be correct.

Many Democrats and liberals in our country DO believe that the asshole won the 2004 election. They don't believe that the Ohio vote was manipulated and compromised. Even to the point where our own candidate believed there was some truth in the asshole's win. While I don't wear a tin foil hat, there is significant evidence that points to the rottenness of the Ohio "win" and while I will never accept that win, I know nothing can really be gained by challenging it right now. Regardless of what I think, the mainstream media has put those of us who believe it was stolen into the category of "conspiracy nuts" where we will remain until there is a way to produce evidence to the contrary.

The eight years that will have transpired since the Republicans took over the white house will be looked at as the worst years in our history, without a doubt. The true history books will not look kindly at the goings-on that have disrupted our country and made us look like nothing but greedy bullies, or even worse. There will, however, be more horror before we can get rid of them forever, and it probably is safe to assume (right now, anyway!) that 2008 will see the long run of the Repubs ending and a new day beginning. It might take awhile before we can salvage what was in existence in 2000, but it can and will be done.

On the other hand, if the pukes are able to continue to pull the wool over everyone's eyes yet again, we really don't deserve to continue to live.

[immoderate]

147. I like this.

First of all, I like Franken's comedy. Maybe it's because I'm Jewish and like to consider myself intellectual. My own orientation is pretty radical, but I can understand that those who want to lead might take a broader approach.

I also think that comity is more often preferential to confrontation. I enjoy his segments with Norm Orenstein from AEI, but note that Joe Conason is his most regular guest and gets nearly co-host status.

In short, Franken has done us a lot of good. What happened to the big tent? This place is so crazy but that's part of why I love it.

--IMM

[Catholic Sensation]

108. Obama is a traitor to the Democrats eh?

Wanting Iraq to become a democracy is such an awful thing :eyes:

The troops are there, they're not coming home any time soon, ranting and raving for something that WILL NOT happen is counter-productive.

And guess what, Bush actually did win by 3%, and the vast majority of Democrats believe this too. Hate to rain on your parade.

[Cooley Hurd]

128. "Bush actually did win by 3%, and the vast majority of Democrats..."

...believe this."

Need proof of this CS, if you wouldn't mind.:eyes:

I don't know ANY Democrat that believes that Ohio was fraud-free.:thumbsdown:

[MattSWin]

130. Where's your proof of vote fraud in Ohio?

I wouldn't put cheating on an election above Bush but where is the evidence?

The election results say Bush won by 3% and unless we have evidence of fraud it's pretty pointless to argue whether or not Bush really won.

Don't forget Kerry even conceded which officially says even he admits there's no solid evidence of fraud.

[liberalismresurgent]

160. Exit polls. Proof (since there was no paper trail)

What proof could have been found from inauditable machines?
Did you audit the machines?

[MattSWin]

165. exit polls aren't really enough to show voter fraud...

Since it's random sampling. You don't poll every voter so you could be wrong.

[Catholic Sensation]

219. Am I allowed to name people on DU who think it was legit?

or will I have to go the route of the liars on DU and say "people have told me in pm's and instant message room chats"

[LoZoccolo]

113. Ha ha ha ha name the Democrats who are /not/ for "seeing it through".

You call these people traitors to the Democrats, but there are only a handful of elected Democrats who are for "troops out now". Your view is a small minority.

[NoPasaran]

115. Franken has never made any secret about being a DLC Democrat

Ans the fact that so many of us usually enjoy his show shows that there isn't that big a gap between most of us and the DLC, despite the hysteria peddled by a small group about the DLC boogeyman.

And yes, Bush won in 2004. Deal with reality or find another hobby.

[SoCalDem]

116. He's always been a moderate.. He's a comedian and pokes fun at everyone

so when he picks on republicans, lots of people think he's a liberal.. he's not that liberal..

[Tinoire]

117. Oh groan... I've always loathed that man...

Urgh... The sooner he's faaaaaar away from us the better.

[Pepperbelly]

119. nope ...

he has the courage to call the righties on their lies to their face, in public and on television. It is not possible to agree with everything that anyone thinks. I believe he's an asset and I am on his side.

edited for spelling.

[Vadem]

120. Yes, you are right! I was listening the other day when I was ....

shocked to hear Al Franken say that he believed that Bush won the 2004 election, and that there was no election fraud in Ohio!

Where in the hell has he been???? What does he read? Hasn't he read TIA's many, many, exposes?

Really, as Dr. Dean says, we can do better! We don't need apologist Repub lite people on AAR radio! We can do better! Get rid of Franken, if he has this position (and he obviously does!) I really wonder why we think he is a liberal and is speaking for us! He is not a liberal and he doesn't speak for me!

[Imagevision]

122. Is this really true about Franken? and Janine Garfallo?

or is this a freepeer planted story??

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

124. Only his hairdresser will ever know...

[PatriotGames]

125. I think we owe it to Iraq to stay. We rustled it up now we have to clean

it up. *'s follies have cost a lot, but we can't just walk away. And I have a brother over there, so I know I have a personal insterest in it.

I also think * needs to step up and be honest about the security situation over.

[Cooley Hurd]

127. PG, I wish it were possible to stabilize Iraq...

...but no amount of US troops can reverse the present situation. Our presence there only reminds the Iraqis of who started this mess.

The only military solution to this is a pan-Arabic peacekeeping force.

I hope your brother comes home very soon, safe and sound. :hug:

[MattSWin]

136. we have to stay until...

Some kind of peace agreement is worked out with the insurgency. I've always said we need to distinguish between insurgents who just want us out of their country and those who are just terrorists.

We should make a deal with the ones who just want us out. We could agree to withdraw our troops if they agree to capture or kill terrorists within the insurgency.

[liberalismresurgent]

156. So if China invades us, let them stay here?

I don't tihnk many americans would like that idea.
Illegal occupations are what they are: illegal.

[MattSWin]

158. it's not illegal...

The UN sanctioned the occupation. Well actually it recognized the occupation as being ended, with the election of the Iraqi govt.

It'd only be illegal if the UN passed a resolution requiring us to leave at the request of Iraq's government.

If China invaded us and we requested them to not leave, yes it'd be legal for them to stay.

[liberalismresurgent]

162. it's illegal

Koffi Annan said so.

[liberalismresurgent]

164. BBC: Kofi says Iraq war illegal

Now it's the UN director against you. Aren't you the same guy thought the Hiroshima bomb was good? I love to prove you wrong. Links rule.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3661134.stm

[MattSWin]

167. The invasion was illegal..

And the occupation was illegal until the election.

According to Article 42 of the Hague Convention, "erritory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army." <2> <3> (pdf) The International Humanitarian Law Research Initiative states: "the wording of Security Council resolution 1546 . . . indicates that, regardless of how the situation is characterized, international humanitarian law will apply to it." <4>

There may be situations... where the former occupier will maintain a military presence in the country, with the agreement of the legitimate government under a security arrangement (e.g., U.S. military presence in Japan and Germany). The legality of such agreement and the legitimacy of the national authorities signing it are subject to international recognition, whereby members of the international community re-establish diplomatic and political relations with the national government. In this context, it is in the interest of all the parties involved to maintain a clear regime of occupation until the conditions for stability and peace are created allowing the re-establishment of a legitimate national government. A post-occupation military presence can only be construed in the context of a viable, stable and peaceful situation. <5> (pdf)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.-led_occupation_of_Iraq#Legal_status_of_the_coalition_presence

[K-W]

169. You can do as many mental summersaults as you want

to try and pretend that the occupation following a war of aggression is legal, but it isnt.

Even if the Iraqi government were legitimate, which it isnt. Even if those elections were legitimate, which they werent, it still doesnt make this occupation legal.

[K-W]

163. Since when?

"It'd only be illegal if the UN passed a resolution requiring us to leave at the request of Iraq's government."

It was an illegal invasion making the occupation clearly illegal.

[MattSWin]

168. it's not considered an occupation any more

According to Article 42 of the Hague Convention, "erritory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army." <2> <3> (pdf) The International Humanitarian Law Research Initiative states: "the wording of Security Council resolution 1546 . . . indicates that, regardless of how the situation is characterized, international humanitarian law will apply to it." <4>

There may be situations... where the former occupier will maintain a military presence in the country, with the agreement of the legitimate government under a security arrangement (e.g., U.S. military presence in Japan and Germany). The legality of such agreement and the legitimacy of the national authorities signing it are subject to international recognition, whereby members of the international community re-establish diplomatic and political relations with the national government. In this context, it is in the interest of all the parties involved to maintain a clear regime of occupation until the conditions for stability and peace are created allowing the re-establishment of a legitimate national government. A post-occupation military presence can only be construed in the context of a viable, stable and peaceful situation. <5> (pdf)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.-led_occupation_of_Iraq#Legal_status_of_the_coalition_presence

[K-W]

170. Yes it is.

Our army is still in control of Iraq.

Wake up.

[MattSWin]

174. Our military is in Iraq...

But they aren't governing Iraq.

The UN has recognized the govt. of Iraq so it is legitimate.

According to the Hague convention Iraq is no longer occupied.

[K-W]

175. Thanks for the right wing propaganda.

If I were you I would drop your pathetic defense of what is obviously a puppet government in a nation that is still obviously controlled by the US military.

Open your eyes and wake up. You can rationalize crimes until the cows come home, they are still crimes.

[MattSWin]

179. I'm not rationalizing the invasion of Iraq...

But it's silly to call Iraq's new government a puppet govt. when the UN even recognized it.

[K-W]

181. It is a puppet government. How is telling the truth silly? EOM

[liberalismresurgent]

183. I guess the 1967 S. Vietnam elections

under the occupation without international observers legitimized it.

[MattSWin]

188. I have no clue what you just said..

It wasn't coherent.

[K-W]

190. ignore mispost

[liberalismresurgent]

191. You do have a clue

You are just pretending.

[MattSWin]

193. 1967 S. Vietnamese election...

The S. Vietnamese govt. was recognized by the UN.

[liberalismresurgent]

197. And who said the UN was right?

You are getting technical. Don't forget I know the Iraqi elections were recogized by the UN, and I maintain there is an occupation.

[MattSWin]

199. Well who else determines which govts are

Legitimate or not except the UN.

[liberalismresurgent]

203. the people determine it

Remember the Warren Commission "determined" there was a lone-nut killer, yet 66% of Americanks think otherwise.
You go with the official line no matter what it is. Many of us don't. That's why .
Remember I believe Kofi Annan, not the official resolution. You also konw that macarthur doens't pass any law or resolution, yet you and I agree with what he said.

[liberalismresurgent]

176. Should US be punished Matt?

for invading Iraq illegally? You choose the punishment. What should it be?

[MattSWin]

180. no the US shouldn't be punished...

The Bush administration should be impeached for it.

[liberalismresurgent]

182. I mean internationally

You and Kofi Annan agree that the invasion was illegal. US Congress is not internationally responsible to punish illegal international invasions.
Choose the punishment. An embargo?

[MattSWin]

184. Let me rephrase...

I'm not sure the invasion itself was illegal. I think the legality of it is more complex than you give it credit for.

Illegal on the international level is very different from illegal in the criminal sense.

Congress authorized war with the intent of disarming Iraq of weapons they were led to believe Iraq had.

Bush misled Congress and the US so punishing the entire country wouldn't be right.

Secondly wouldn't we just veto any resolution punishing us?

[liberalismresurgent]

187. You are not sure, but Koffi is

And he's a better source than you are.

[MattSWin]

189. it was his opinion...

There was no resolution passed and the UN Secretary doesn't rule by decree.

[liberalismresurgent]

194. it contravened the UN charter

=illegal.
Remember the Hiroshima bomb which you did not want to debate? No law or resolution was passed against it. We were talking about the opinion of MacArthur (whom you agreed with) and Leahy....
Getting technical is all you can do at this moment.
You even refuse to give your own opinion about the legality of the invasion. You researched the Hague thing. Why not research the charter?

[MattSWin]

198. I know what the UN charter says....

I just find it pointless to debate the legality of the invasion because Congress was misled into authorizing the war.

[liberalismresurgent]

200. the war victims might not find it pointless.

iMO

[MattSWin]

202. I doubt it...

If he UN said the war was legal it wouldn't make those people any less dead.

[liberalismresurgent]

204. did I say dead?

Victim is One who is harmed or killed by another, not just dead: "a victim of a mugging" for example.
And I'm sure they would be less bitter if this was a legal war with the participation of the whole UN and with a good purpose.

[liberalismresurgent]

206. be back at 5:30

when i get home. i was supposed to eat at 12:30 but i got caught up in these debates....
c u then.

[K-W]

196. And the opinion of experts on international law. EOM

[liberalismresurgent]

131. Franken said Hiroshima bomb was good

yesterday in his radio show (you can download the show in air america website) Franken said that the Hiroshima bomb was necessary because many more people would have died otherwise.
This idiot chose to ignore the fact that it has been proven that Japan was already militarily defeated.

[liberalismresurgent]

132. Franken: No machine fraud in 2004

"because i spoke with one MIT friend of mine and he assured that there was no systematic or willing fraud in 2004", I remember him saying.
Before you DLC'ers ask me for a transcript, be aware that there are no trnascripts of past Al Franken shows. I heard it with my ears and there is no reason for me to try to smear Franken.
Now if you have doubts, email Fraken and ask what's his position about the diebold machines.

[MattSWin]

134. you just called him an idiot...

Of course you're intending to smear him.

[MattSWin]

133. That's a "well known fact"?

Where was this proven that Japan was militarily defeated when the bomb was dropped?

Al Franken is an idiot because he doesn't repeat a made up fact often spouted by Pat Buchanan, Lew Rockwell, and other Worldnutdaily columnists?

[liberalismresurgent]

135. When did I call him an idiot?

You are trying to smear me.

[MattSWin]

139. reread your posts....

You said This idiot chose to ignore the fact that it has been proven that Japan was already militarily defeated.

[liberalismresurgent]

138. LA Times: both bombs unnecessary

Not just Buchanan my simplistic centrist friend:

"The hard truth is that the atomic bombings were unnecessary. A million lives were not saved."
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-bird5aug05,0,760322.story

[MattSWin]

Kai Bird sure isn't a mainstream historian...

His foreign policy views are very similar to Buchanan's, very isolationist.

[liberalismresurgent]

144. So Wikipedia lied?

That's subjective. You are cornered because I gave you an LATimes and a Wikipedia link, and all you can say is that Wikipedia lied about those Generals saying the bombs were unnecessary.

[MattSWin]

150. I never said they lied...

I said you removed those statements from their context.

[liberalismresurgent]

142. Wikipedia: Both bombs unnecessary

The highest-ranking officer in the Pacific Theater, General Douglas MacArthur, was not consulted beforehand, but said afterward that there was no military justification for the bombimgs. The same opinion was expressed by Fleet Admitral William Leahy (Chief of Staff of the President).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki

[MattSWin]

145. You left out this part of the article....

However, it should be noted that the Survey assumed that continued conventional attacks on Japan -- with additional direct and indirect casualties -- would be needed to force surrender by the November or December dates mentioned.

I don't want to debate the dropping of the bomb though.

[liberalismresurgent]

146. So why did you reply to my message?

My message was about Franken backing the HIroshima bomb. If it was true that you didn't want to debate the dropping of the bomb, you would not have replied to my post. The issue was not conventional attacks.

[MattSWin]

151. Franken was right though...

Bombing Hiroshima prevented us from losing hundreds of thousands of US troops if we had to resort to conventional attacks.

[liberalismresurgent]

153. It's you against Leahy and MacArthur

To be more accurate, you and a DLC'ers against Leahy and MacArthur.
Time to make our choices.
By the way, I thought you didn't want to debate the bomb dropping.

[MattSWin]

155. I don't really disagree with what they said...

As far as not wanting to debate the bomb, I don't, but I'm certainly not going to let you put words in my mouth.

I never said I disagreed with what MacAurthur said.

[liberalismresurgent]

159. Excellent

Now that you agree with him, we can all conclude that : The bombs were unnecessary. I love harmony.

[MattSWin]

161. The bombs weren't unnecessary...

I never said that nor did MacAurthur. He said dropping the bomb was militarly unnecessary to end the war.

I agree that we could've won the war without dropping the bomb, it just would've probably required several more months of conventional attacks and the loss of hundreds of thousands of US soldiers.

Part of MacAurthur's criticism was probably due to bitterness over being removed as Allied commander.

[liberalismresurgent]

166. no military justification

No=none

MacArthur "said afterward that there was no military justification for the bombings" re-read the wikipedia link.
Not only was it not necessary to end the war, it was unnecessary period. I repeat "No military justification".

[MattSWin]

171. As I said...

MacAurthur was bitter because he was removed as Allied commander because he wanted to pursue a strategy with Japan that Truman didn't agree with.

[liberalismresurgent]

185. I thought you didnt disagree with MacArthur

Or do you?

[MattSWin]

192. I'm not sure...

I'd have to be a psychic to know what would have happened if MacAurthur's plans were followed.

I do think we could've ended the war without dropping the bombs but it would've cost hundreds of thousands of US troops lives and several more months of war. And just as many, if not more Japanese still would've been killed.

[liberalismresurgent]

195. I know we're not psychics

These are opinions we are giving,and you know it. The argument could have ended if you had said you were not a psychic in your first post instead of blaming MacArthur remarks over some bitterness.

[MattSWin]

201. I do think his remarks are basically not intended to

Say dropping the bomb was wrong but his way of saying "If I was in charge I could've ended it without dropping the bomb."

[liberalismresurgent]

205. So you are a psychic after all

Anyways, according to you he was bitter, so whatever he intended to say was due to bitterness.

[K-W]

143. Yes, we can judge intelligence based on knowledge of one issue.

Sounds fair to me.

[rinsd]

148. Okay.....

So how many more people would have died in continued firebombings not even taking into account a possible invasion(possibly jointly with the Russians)?

[Doctor_J]

141. He's a good Dem, but his show has gotten off track

Too much time given to wing nuts, too little/too meek contradiction of their lies, not nearly enough passion. Example: "I think the administration is misleading the people, and I think of it is intentional" Whaaaa? Call them liars, cowards, and traitors, which is what they are.

I'll take Malloy and Hartmann.

[The Gunslinger]

173. The show should be called "The Fairness to the President Show"

THats all he says anymore.........In fairness to the president, In fairness to the president, In fairness to the president.

Sorry AL I dont think its right for The king to be on his ranch chopping wood for 5 weeks while soldiers are dying and a grieving mother is asking Why? on his doorstop.

[MattSWin]

177. it's called playing devil's advocate...

My God some DUers think if you even say "I agree with Bush that breathing oxygen is beneficial to human beings" you're a right-winger.

[The Gunslinger]

211. whatever

He defended king George's 5 week vacation saying he can work for anywhere. I disagree, and also have noticed that since returning from the first of his own many vacations in July, AL has seemed to qualify he says about Bush, and has gone out of his way to let everyone know that he thinks the troops should coutinue to occupy Iraq. He seems to me to be leaning more to the right, and yes I know he's in the center, but there has been a change about him recently. I am pointing that out. Fan boys of the the show might not notice and say things like you said.

[MattSWin]

221. Very subjective statements....

The people here criticizing Franken are the people who think anyone who doesn't call for troops to withdraw today is a right-winger.

I think it'd be silly to just withdraw without first brokering a peace plan between the new Iraqi government and the insurgents. We can't just leave Iraq in chaos.

[Doctor_J]

212. Exactly

he spends half of every show apologizing for *'s behavior. If he would devote that 90 min to using the words "liar", "perjuror", "coward", "ignoramus", and "evil", I mght start tuning in again.

[Gabi Hayes]

172. He's reallly missing a huge point today, regarding NARAL

check it out
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4328031

[GoldenOldie]

186. Give Me a Break!

That's why we are not called the "Kool-ade drinkers."

Some bitch about Al, others Rhandi, etc., because they don't perform the way they think they should.

Each one of these personalities are different from the other and each one offers a different slant on an issue.....I love them all and each has given me information and an education on things that I was totally unaware of.

How refreshing to turn on AAR at any time and not have to listen to the parroting of the latest Rove script such as O'Reilly, Hannity, Scarborough, Tweety, etc., etc. Each of the AAR personalities give their own individual knowledge and bent on a story and each may have a piece and when combining all this brain power we can get a more complete picture to form our opinions.......unlike all the whoring of the regular media.

[Dr Fate]

208. Exactly- Randi & Malloy balance O'Franken- but all of them are allies.

O'Franken cracks me up!

"Wait! Wait! Dont Lie to Me!!!"

[Dr Fate]

207. GOD BLESS AL O'FRANKEN!!!!

I dont agree with 100% of his points- but I do agree about 85% of the time. Better ratio than any Rightie talk or TV news, I must say.

His show is FUNNY! I lOVE the theme songs for guests, and all the comic bits.

He exposes, documents & itemizes Bush & media lies daily.

ANYONE left of center with a microphone is our FRIEND.

Why dont the detractors see that?

[mzmolly]

213. Exactly!!!

For gawd sakes there aren't two people in this party who agree on EVERYTHING. It's agreeing on the most important things that matter.

[liberalismresurgent]

210. Springer's replacement is better than Springer

by far. Springer should stay on vacation.

[liberalismresurgent]

224. Graph. I like it.

[blondeatlast]

215. DU, DU, DU--don't you see a drive-by post when you, well, see it?

This thing has (now) 215 replies? Tsk, tsk.

[mzmolly]

216. I LOVE AL FRANKEN! I plan to tune in as often as possible. As far as

I'm concerned the only people who consider him a threat, are those with Right Wing ideals.

Off to listen to "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell them..."

By the way Al has always claimed to be DLC, many good Democrats are. Many who participate right here in fact.

:hi:

[ecoalex]

218. Thanks

for the disparagement. I say I'm not happy with a pro corporate politician, and I get disparaged.A DLC Dem is a corporate junkie Dem, I have no use for it. I want a party for US not the corporations. There is no half way.

[mzmolly]

220. Oh goodness. I am a fan of Paul Wellstone, who is from my home state

and he (among others) believed in a party of by and for the people ... however he knew an asset to the cause when he saw one, and Franken is an asset indeed. Franken is also on the advisory committee at Wellstone.org and a personal family friend to the Wellstone's.

http://www.wellstone.org/about/advisors.aspx

Know thy enemy ecoalex. I know that many who troll here claim to have the best interest of the "left" at heart, and said people also are good at playing the victim.

You may be sincere and you may not be, regardless Al Franken is an intelligent, useful, articulate, successful, sincere part of our Party and he's here to stay.

Disparaged? I think you started the disparaging thing with Al Franken, right? One good turn deserves another as they say.

Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[MattSWin]

223. Paul Wellstone voted for DOMA was he a traitor?

So by the standards set by people here Wellstone was a traitor to Democrats.

[MattSWin]

222. DLC is not "pro-corporation"

One of their biggest issues is eliminating corporate subsidies.

What exactly is pro-corporate about the DLC?

[tsuki]

225. I don't know if you can get Thom Hartmann, but he is great. I have

never listened to Al, so I can't tell you. Hartman's lunch broadcast with Bernie every Friday is terrific. I hate when I miss it.

[Montauk6]

226. His DLC ties are well-documented.

I first learned this that the Book Expo showdown where Tall Boy made an utter ass of himself.

But I just wonder how Franken reconciles his DLC views with his support of Wellstone, who was DEFINITELY no DLCer.

[FreedomAngel82]

228. He believes Bush won in 2000?

Ha! Won my butt!