Ken Mehlmen wiped the floor with Tom Vilsack on Late Edition

[dolstein]

Sorry Tom, you just got your ass kicked. I've just listened to the feed from CNN radio, and once again, the Republicans have demonstrated just how badly the Democrats are outgunned.

Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. The Democrats have had the GOP's talking points on the Rove affair for days. They've had enough time to debunk those talking points and come up with talking points of their own. They haven't. The Democrats' political death wish continues unabated.

Let me just single out two points. First, the GOP has compiled a litany of criticisms against Joe Wilson. Many of these are flat-out untrue, and the others are at least debatable. Personally, I think the best response to this kind of tactic is for the Democratatic spokesperson to point out that (1) it was the original GOP smear campaign against Joe Wilson that led to the disclosure of a covert CIA agent's identity and the appointment of a special prosector and (2) that the minute it was discovered that the administration had lied to the press about Rove's involvement in the leaking of Valerie Plame's identity, instead of coming clean to the American public, the administration chose to resume their smear campaign against Joe Wilson. In addition, the Democrats need to be willing to defend Joe Wilson. Why not simply quote the first President Bush's words of praise?

Second, the GOP is trying to paint Karl Rove as someone who's honest and a straight shooter. Talk about chutzpah. This argument is so easy to demolish, in large part because nobody in Washington actually believes it's true. All the Democrats have to do is run down the list of smear campaigns Karl Rove has orchestrated against fellow Republicans, beginning with John McCain. Why can't they simply be candid? Why can't they same something along the lines of: "Look, Karl Rove is one of the most effective and successful political operatives in the business. But even Republicans know the guy's scum. He is, after all, the guy who orchestrated the ugly smear campaign against John McCain. I understand that politics is a full contact sport, but even politics has its limits. And Karl Rove has crossed the line one too many times."

[tjdee]

1. Did he mention Poppy Bush FIRED Rove for leaking to Novak?

If not, I really have to wonder.

Why don't the Dems understand media control?

:grr:

[Imagevision]

84. Mehlmen can wipe any floor he wants-NOTHING is changing the facts!

It boils down to what-when the white house knew what they knew and what they did with the inormation once they learned Wilson came up with no yellow-cake was purchased by Saddam and Bush went ahead to claim he did then retracted his statement made in the state of the union address.

Then Smear campaign begins on Wison and wife.

[BamaLefty]

2. And That's The DLC On Display For You Folks!

That in a nutshell, they will screw us over in 2006 again.

Democratic Leadership Council-- Triggers my Gag Reflex :eyes:

[dolstein]

8. Don't kid yourself -- this is a party-wide problem

I haven't heard any Democratic spokeman yet who can go toe-to-toe with Ken Mehlman. Howard Dean is consistently unprepared and off-message in his TV appearances. And now that Dean runs the DNC, you certainly can't lay the deficiency of the party's message operation at the DLC's doorstep.

[lateo]

29. Well...maybe one...

Howard Dean. But that kind of proves your point doesn't it?

[Larkspur]

68. Dean follows Lakoff's "re-framing" theory that is why pro-DLC dolstein

thinks Dean is consistaently unprepared and off-message. Howard Dean is not following the DLC party line and that is why pro-DLC dolstein thinks Dean is unprepared.

Dean is rebuilding the Party from the grassroots up and employing progressive Professor George Lakoff's "re-framing" theory. Along with Dean's courage to challenge Repuke hyprocrisy, that is why he's getting standing ovations in places, like Montana, who gave the "finger" to the DLC mode of politics and retook the Governor's office and some other top offices from the Repukes.
See Dean wows (Montana) Dems with speech http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?id=1&display=rednews/2005/07/17/build/state/58-dean.inc and Strategic pep talk shows why Dean's the life of the party http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050717/NEWS01/507170301/1002


Dean's TV appearences lately have been the best I've every seen him. He nailed it on Hardball and on The Daily Show.

[Eloriel]

80. But that's just not good enough, Larkspur

He has to please Dolstein. And we BOTH know that's an impossibility.

:evilgrin:

Thanks for the Montana links -- hadn't heard about the praise for him out there (tho I'm NOT surprise!). Go, DEAN!!!!!

[chapel hill dem]

17. In the last eight months, I have had my chain yanked by the DNC

(DLC?) one too many times. The Boxer challenge fizzled. The DNC/Brazile Ohio investigation was basically "nothing happened - move along". Where is Hillary with election reform? What is the core platform for 2006? The RNC has told me so many times that we do not have a platform that I am beginning to believe it. The only time we show energy and unity is when we take the bait and pursue scandals like the Plame/Rove mess.

I wish Dean would hammer out three or four big platform planks and let us memorize and focus on them and let the "gotcha" stuff play out in the courts.

/rant off.

[NYCGirl]

30. You might want to start with the DNC agenda here:

http://democrats.org/agenda.html

[chapel hill dem]

48. Thanks for the link. The 10 (or 12) points are good, but too many in

number. Reagan kept repeating his three points (lower taxes, smaller gov't and stronger military) with great effect. What will our 90 second "elevator pitch" be for 2006? Can we get the message down to three or four points that we all can believe in and defend?

[Dr Fate]

73. Simple. They dont read DU. They watch CNN & read the NY Times.

And they still think those are "pro Democrat" sources for some reason.

DEMs need to get tuned into our echo chamber instead of relying on "conventional wisdom."

[Eloriel]

81. Uh, no, you HAVEN'T had your chain yanked by the DNC

You've had your chain yanked by individual Congresspeople. (Well, I'll sort of give you a point on the Brazile investigation -- when I heard she was at the helm, I had absolutely no faith in it whatsoever.)

Please remember that the House and Senate Dem Leaders required Dean NOT to be involved in policy. He's FORBIDDEN from hammering out any planks.

But he's not forbidden from getting out there and humping, day in and day out, building...building...building this party from the inside out, grassroots up. He's getting SRO crowds in places that no one thinks of as having ANY Democrats or a Democratic Party at all, and he's making those state Party oranizations viable again.

Please don't blame Dean for the failure of other Dems. He's the ONE person doing his job, getting results, building us up. The ONE Dem we can, indeed, rely on (IMO). The ONE Dem actually getting results.

[chapel hill dem]

87. You are right -- I should not waste my energy throwing stones, but

should use it to help develop the three or four concise points. Limiting it to three, and knowing that many important issues will not make the cut, what three issues would you rank as the ones that could change votes from R to D, especially in swing states?

[yurbud]

93. I have posted this a couple of times. Dean mentioned 4

during primaries

He said there are 4 things that 95% of Americans can agree they want:

good jobs
good schools
affordable access to good healthcare
safety (from threats foreign and domestic)

He can do this talking point thing. Other democrats suck at it so much because they are serving conflicting constituencies: us and corporate America.

The GOP doesn't have a problem with this because the religious right is so far off in cloud cookoo land, that you can say whatever you need to to make them happy and not offend business or spend a dime. You can hand them a turd and they'll think it's a tootsie roll.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[FormerRepublican]

3. They need to turn to old Gumby and say:

"Why are you so obsessed with Wilson? What difference does it make what Wilson did? You can obsess over him if you want to, but MY concern is the safety of the American people. It's clear that classified leaks from the White House to the press find their way into the hands of our enemies. That's totally unacceptable! Nothing is done to stop these leaks. That's even more unacceptable! Even YOU should understand that!"

End of argument.

[ooglymoogly]

42. perfect response. nt

[Mythsaje]

4. It's obvious

many Dems need emergency spinal replacement surgery.

Should we start a fund?

It's irritating that Republicans (arguably an ignorant bunch in general who wouldn't know a creative thought if it walked up and bit them in the leg) are demonstrating quicker wits than the Dems we've got on the Hill.

What's up with them?

Okay, I'm going to be highly pissed off if I have to run for congress just to put someone who can think on their feet in office. I don't WANT to be a politician.

Besides, the skeletons in my closet don't need a grand tour of the national media.

[emulatorloo]

5. 1. Joe Wilson didn't leak a spy's name 2. Ask McCain's "illegitimate

black baby" to vouch for Karl Rove and get back to me. Seems pretty simple to me.

Vilsack has always been ineffective against Republicans -- he's my governor, I outta know.

[JHBowden]

6. Our leadership really, really blows.

I'm way past fed up with the morons at the DLC (Democrats Lose Constantly). They evidently must think that one needs no tactics or strategy to win any debate. I now see the light. One needs no facts or logic in convincing voters or winning debates; pretending one is a Republican is all one needs for an assured victory in any environment.

:banghead:

[Flubadubya]

27. The DLC... Jesse Jacson nailed it spot on...

The Democratic Leisure Class... 'nuff said! :puke:

[TheDebbieDee]

7. I also read that Brit Hume of Faux news mopped the floor with.........

CA Congresswoman Jane Harman earlier today.

I don't know why they agree to go on these shows without preparing to defend themselves.

They make us Dems look like aimless doofi/doofuses!

[Zen Democrat]

9. I actually thought Russert slapped Mehlman upside the head today

and Podesta was very good.

[JHBowden]

13. Yeah, Podesta was sharp this morning.

It isn't like the Republicans are unbeatable. We just have to start showing up for once.

[DemsUnited]

28. What Podesta did was perfect.

When Mehlman tried to trash Joe Wilson, Podesta didn't take even a crumb of bait. He just said "you would love for this to be about Joe Wilson, wouldn't you?" Then he moved on to HIS talking points.

When Mehlman try to peddle how different the Republicans would act if the situation was reversed, Podesta simply said "you must have slept through the 90's" and once again moved on to his talking points.

The repugs WANT the dems to spend the few minutes they have on these shows defending Wilson and/or the Clinton years.

Podesta had it right. Don't rise to the bait. Scoff at the remark then move on to the REAL issue.

[KC21304]

10. These politicans have not a clue how to

rebut these RNC talking points. And almost everyone on DU could do it much better. Why don't they check with the bloggers, or better yet let the bloggers take over for them. The lefty bloggers are up to speed and could blow Mehlmen out of the water.

[nyhuskyfan]

18. We had six months to respond to the $87 billion question in 2004...

And goddamnit, other than Al and Randi on AAR (preaching to the choir), nobody, including Kerry himself, did a good job refuting that talking point. With six months to hear it over and over, the best he could come with was "I made a mistake talking about the war, he made a mistake sending us to war..." -- when it would have been so easy to pin it back on the right for voting against the $87 billion in the first place.

That really pissed me off. The Republicans message is always simple -- but they use the echo chamber to get their one or two sentences to resonate in people's minds. Getting caught off guard without a good response by a right-wing talking point is frankly inexcusable.

[Stinky The Clown]

11. And this would be a surprise because .......... ?

DLC = Appeasers

SemiDem/SemiRepub

Uncertain

Neither

Go along to get along

Wishy washy

Stand for nothing

Wimps

Need I go on ..... ?

[wli]

16. try GOP/AEI moles

[Burried News]

54. Agree . I used to argue for a viable third party, but to get there we'll

have to construct a viable second party.

"AEI moles". Some things need to be said more than once.

[wli]

70. the electoral system is exploitable

Not just Diebold, either. Basically the winner-takes-all affairs shut out smaller parties. In fact, the only reason one party wouldn't dominate completely is basically either collusion or occasional re-emergence of parties surrounding immensely popular causes. The "electoral college" etc. is even worse.

Anyway, the largest vulnerabilities are the spoiler effect and gerrymandering. IRV (the proposed "reform") is vulnerable to both. CSSD (Cloneproof Schwarz Sequential Dropping) and CWP (Cardinal Weighted Pairs) are much better.

Another issue is the voting blocs in the legislatures. In this case the parliamentary style is vastly superior: allocate seats to parties based on shares of the vote.

I'm not optimistic about any of this.

[Coexist]

52. that's it in a nutshell

they turn my stomach.

Kick 'em hard and they come back for more.
DLC = Demophony Lay-Down Cowards

[Skip Intro]

12. Spin really takes a back seat in this one.

What does it matter if JW is exactly what the right wants to paint him?

It changes nothing. Has no bearing on the investigation at all. Is in no way a justification for breaking the law and weakening our security. Wilson, at this point, really doesn't matter.

By the same token, if KM looked better in the eyes of some in a face to face than TV did, well, that's too bad. I didn't see it, and I take your word on it, but really - it doesn't matter. It doesn't change the facts of what happened before, the crimes that were commited, the conspiracy that was hatched.

[Cha]

25. Fitzgerald couldn't care less

what talking points melhman has down.

But, the Dems who do get out there on national tv should have their facts down.

[still_one]

14. did you ever think that just maybe that was the idea from CNN

there is no way they would have matched him with wilson

[mike_c]

15. why don't they simply point out that Joe Wilson has NOTHING..

...to do with it? Republicans can no longer pretend that Rove didn't do it, so the new tactic is to divert attention to Wilson, and to undermine his credibility. It's a diversionary tactic, plain and simple, and ANY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of it-- even to refute it-- simply makes the diversion successful. The matter begins and ends with Rove and anyone else in the WH or State Department who gave up an undercover operative for dirty politics.

[dolstein]

19. Frankly, I don't think that's good enough

We shouldn't like the GOP get away with trashing Joe Wilson. If all we do is say "Joe Wilson isn't the issue," from the standpoint of the viewed, the Democrats are essentially conceding that what the GOP says about Wilson is true.

[mike_c]

22. but by following that lead, dems allow repubs to frame the issue...

...on their own terms. I agree however, Wilson should be protected. One strategy might be to divorce the two topics, i.e. NEVER discuss Wilson directly in the context of Rove/Plame, but to separately debunk RNC talking points about Wilson, and ONLY in the context of discussing the Bush administration's lies about Iraqi WMDs. Make no mistake, the repubs are trying to make Wilson the central focus of the discussion-- it's the only weak point they've identified. We MUST deny them that opportunity.

[Yupster]

90. It's a tough call because

if you ignore Wilson, then he just gets trashed day after day and the average person who doesn't follow the story just hears Wilson is bad.

If you defend Wilson, then you have partisan warfare, which is just what the Republicans want to say the story is.

[Al-CIAda]

36. They're trying to smear Wilson, and they have never stopped

trying to smear Wilson since he first wrote his article. This is part of 'motive' ("an attack on Wilson", says a Judge). He busted them on false claims and forged documents. Wilson MUST be smeared.

As far as the main subject, I agee with the majority here. Good posts re:no excuse not to be prepared. This is pathetic.

[GR]

20. Mehlman Is A Big, Big Liar....

He refuses to back down, no matter what evidence he is confronted with. He just keeps on lying. That's what he did on Russert and he looked bad to anyone paying attention. Harmon did ok with Hume but again, to someone who didn't know the facts, Hume sounded ok because he said the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence had attacked Wilson, when in reality it was three republican senators from that committee who attacked Wilson in "Additional Views" section of the report not signed by the full committee.

As for Vilsack...I didn't see it so don't know but would wager Mehlman lied his ass off and Vilsack was too shocked at the blatant lying to respond appropriately...

[Lecky]

65. Yes it was amazing to watch the lies and spin flow out of Mehlman's

foul mouth. He just blatantly lies like no one I have ever seen. He is shameless, I am willing to bet that people can see through that. I was in complete disbelief at what a loathsome spiteful fellow he is.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

21. I don't think they do their homework

Vilsack looked like he simply didn't know the facts. Biden also looked kind of weak on CNN in opposing Hatch. He offered to response to Hatch's claims about Wilson having lied.

Aren't the networks themselves choosing which individuals they want to defend a particular side? I would assume the Republicans are out there actively trying to get on shows, whereas the Democrats are waiting until someone calls them.

[Robbien]

23. The DLC/Vilsack is pro-corporate, their homework is not progressive

They are more likely to support the RNC viewpoint on this issue. Of course he appears weak if one is supposed to believe he is a progressive.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gloria]

24. Why don't we have designated speakers on key issues, train them,

and put them out there CONSISTENTLY???

People with mouth, like Schumer, for example.
Clark on military/foreign affairs instead of stewing over there at FAUX losing his dignity.

Or someone with "statesmanship" who can talk when motivated, like Levin.

Kerry, for god's sake, is brilliant in ONE ON ONE situations...

[Telly Savalas]

85. Agreed. We have a lot of really talented talking heads in the party...

but for whatever reason, we always send in folks who are too busy trying to look fair and nonpartisan and fail to notice that they're getting their asses handed to them in a debate. The GOP sends their attack dogs to the news shows. We'd do well to send ours too.

[JNelson6563]

26. Well Vilsack won't offend the Rethugs

so I hope you're not surprised.

Julie

[KoKo]

46. Nope...when he repeated over and over "We Democrats are Doing People's

Business" I knew he was a DLC'er copying the Bush Message. A Repug Lite, who should go to the party he fits in with...REPUBLICAN...all the way. :puke:

[zulchzulu]

31. Mehlman being a fucking liar makes him nothing more than a scumbag

If Vilsack didn't call him on lies, he needs more prep work before going on the tube. Not having seen the interview, it's hard to tell if Vilsack sucked or not...

All you need to see is Mehlman defending the indefensible and debunked...if he was more "convincing", that's like saying his shit was creamier than yesterday.

[Catrina]

35. Lol

That picture is funny ~

Mehlman is a pathological liar. The only one who got him riled was Podesta. Joe Biden allowed Orin Hatch to take up time, and then acted like a weakling when he finally got a word in.

Not ONE Democrat responded to the talking point that 'Rove is an honest man etc etc.' with some truth, such as:

'Then do you think he was wrongfully fired by Pres. Bush Sr. for unethical behavior back in 1992, Ken?

Come to think of it, this is beginning to sound familiar, Ken! Bush Sr. fired him for using Novak to smear a member of the Bush campaign back in 1992. And now he's doing it again, and using the same columnist, Novak?

So, are you saying that Bush Sr. should have allowed Karl to lie about a man he had respect for? Is that what you're saying, Ken? Are you saying now, that we should allow Karl Rove to again use Novak to smear another man for whom Bush Sr. had respect for? So much respect in fact that he has written to him personally (have props ready, letters from Bush Sr. etc.)

Something like that ~ and it needs to be someone who keeps talking over them, determined to get those points out, no matter how hard they try to stop them.

I give up on them. Mehlman is easy!! I know a few people here in NY who could make mince meat out of him in a few seconds because he LIES!! Podesta silenced him a few times, but the rest of them haven't used the ammunition they have to shut him up.

They should keep repeating that Republicans are soft on National Security. Just keep slamming them with the truth. That's all you can do with liars ~

[alcibiades_mystery]

32. Do me a favor dolstein

Provide a similarly detailed post next time you think a Dem has won an argument on one of these shows.

I agree with your assessment, btw, but I'm curious as to whether you can post anything positive at all.

[dolstein]

58. I don't have time for specifics, but I thought Podesta was pretty good

I'm listening to the Meet the Press feed on C-SPAN radio, and Podesta seems to be holding his own against Mehlman.

[alcibiades_mystery]

60. Thanks

n/t

[Lefty48197]

33. Very good talking points Dolstein

we should put you in charge.

[Pepperbelly]

34. our side is LAZY ...

our spokespeople never do the homework. It shows. Harmon on FNS sucked the ass when Hume went down the list of gop talking points, each and every one of which is stupid and anyone on DU could show was stupid yet Harmon didn't have a clue.

Gore was cursed by lazy spokespeople and so was Kerry. We need to get rid of the whole bunch of the incompetent slackers and get some folk who can and will do the work to repond to the bullshit.

[Totally Committed]

37. I agree... these mealy-mouth, meak-as-lambs, weak-as-dishwater

appeasing wimp-ass Democrats are embarrassing and they are dangerous. All this equivocating, and crouching in corners is really pissing me off. Vilsak sucked. Harmon sucked. The middle wing of the Democratic Party is getting on my last good nerve...

The middle-of-the-road is the most dangerous place to be... you always end up road-kill.

TC

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

38. Why don't the networks and cable ever have Bernie Ward on?

Bernie Ward could cut wind that would make a better argument than Vilsack or Biden. Seriously, I think the networks decide who they want to oppose the right wing propagandists and they usually chose the meekest and most ill-prepared Democrat spokespeople.

[TankLV]

83. That is, when they have a single Democrat on at all.

Mostly it's just repukes dissing the country UNOPPOSED!

[Catherine Vincent]

39. It's very simple.

Mehlman is very good at lying and has more experience. Who in the heck is Vilsak?

[Al-CIAda]

41. The newest dive taking appeaser from the Democratically devisive DLC. n/t

[fujiyama]

78. Tom Vilsack

is the governor of Iowa and is set to have sort of leadership role in the DLC.

At one time he was seen as a possible VP for Kerry. Some also say he has presidential ambitions.

[pdxmom]

40. Vilsack was playing nice and

that's not what we need at this time. I don't think we should be sticking with the "he should be fired" soundbite. We need to come back at them point for point.

John King did a better job holding Mehlman's feet to the fire than Vilsack did. Called Mehlman on it every time he asked him a question and all Mehlman did was respond with a talking point.

[snowbear]

43. You're giving Mehlman too much credit dolstein

Pencil-nosed Mehlman avoided answering any questions with direct answers in that interview. He WHINED like a woosie throughout the entire interview about how Democrats just want to "smear, smear, smear"

Meanwhile - if you listen to both interviews, the only one smearing anyone was Mehlman. :eyes:

He didn't "wow" anyone and was not convincing. Vilsack was actually a breath of fresh air after that whiner. You're giving the guy far too much credit.

[pgh_dem]

56. IMO more accurate...Mehlman was broad side of barn, Vilsack

couldn't hit him, or just chose not to.

Vilsack's only fresh air was what passed through his empty suit.

John King spent a good bit of time making little sidewise 'Tom's eyeing the WH in 08' comments, I struggled to keep down my breakfast.

[ooglymoogly]

44. anybody who cannot beat ken mehlman in a debate

should not be head of anything except the losers club.

[KoKo]

45. Dolstein...

.I've been on DU about as long as you have...and this is the first post of yours that I totally agree on... Handshake...good job.. :-)'s

I always associate you with I/P FORUM (nothing dissing about that), but this post just cuts to the heart of the matter for me and many other Dems... Not trying to call you out here or anything...just glad to see your post and glad that one oldie DU'er can praise another DU'er that they always seen as "ships passing in the night but it ends up we agree on a MAJOR POINT!" :applause:

[geek tragedy]

47. When a Republican debates a DINO, of course the Republican

will win. He doesn't have identity-confusion.

[gulfcoastliberal]

49. What is the dems major malfunction when it comes to debunking a puke

talking head? This is what happened during the entire 2004 campaign and it continues unabated. Why, why, why can't the dems refute the RNC talking points/heads? I just don't get it.

[Sparkly]

51. That's a good question, and dolstein has a good point.

I think it's largely about organization, or what Republicans call "discipline." Notice there aren't a huge array of Republicans on talk shows. Those who appear use the exact same phrases, following the day's script word for word.

Understandably, the Democratic party is not a bunch of automated parrots, and different Democrats have different views of things. However, too many don't do their homework. I agree with dolstein that there's no excuse for going on a show without knowing what Mehlman is going to say. The Republicans are predictable to an extreme in these things, and Democrats need to be ready with answers.

If they were like Republicans, all with the same answers using the same phrases, it'd help get across a party "message." That's difficult given the nature of our party. Still, it'd be helpful if there were somebody issuing a daily blast-fax as required reading for any Democrat going on a talk show. I'm not sure if this is being done or not.

[usregimechange]

50. We are the voice of the Democrats!!!

[brentspeak]

53. Hold on, here. Just how did Mehlman "wipe the floor"

with Vilsack? I didn't see the debate, but I've heard differing opinions on it. Explain to us how Vilsack did so poorly, in your opinion.

[pgh_dem]

57. they didn't debate...King let Mehlman spew for 10-15 min

then they went to commercial, then a weather update, then Vilsack.

Vilsack let all of Mehlman's completely weak, easily debunked talking points stand, while he waxed poetic with an ode to 'moving on with the people's bi-partisan business'.

In short, he was butt.

[Lecky]

66. I wasn't paying much attention to Vilsack

I was in awe at the audacity of Mehlman, he came across as a sociopathic liar. All the man does is just spit out lie after lie bashing any democrat he can think of at the moment. He has no strategy, he's just a ruthless liar!

Maybe Vilsack was in much shock as I was...fucking Mehlman is a maniac and not in a way that I think is doing his party any favors.

[pgh_dem]

67. Agree 100% on Mehlman's pathological lying...but it works if not called

on it.

Vilsack's non-response was inexcusable, especially in light of John King's willingness to accept GOP talking points in place of actual discussion.

Vilsack being shocked is no excuse...everything Mehlman said, he'd been saying for days, and being ill-prepared to answer those lies (1. Wilson never said Cheney sent him, 2. Wilson never said he *proved* that there was no sale, only that he found no proof that the yellowcake had been sought, 3. Wilson's wife was in NO position to have 'sent' him to Niger) just makes him a schmuck.

Furthermore, repeating GOP talking points like 'moving on to the people's business' only bolsters Mehlman/GOP propaganda by implicitly conceding that criminal charges against the pResident's deputy chief of staff is just some partisan brouhaha that 'centrist' or 'bipartisan' politicians would rather not be focused on.

[Quixote1818]

55. We really need Randi Rhodes to make the rounds on this

She would have Mehlmen's head spinning so fast he might take flight like a helicopter.

Never send an nice guy when you can send the Queen.

[formernaderite]

59. As much as we'd like to think we're playing offense in this scandal mill..

we're playing defense with our chances of moving ahead and gaining seats in 2006. Have we not learned from history? What happened to the repubs in 98? Joe and Suzie Q public...don't give a shit about scandal mongering....and no, if it's not salacious it won't even hold their attention.

Where is our message for an election that is less than 18 months away?

Until this prosecutor finds some irrefutable evidence of perjury etc. we're blowing bubbles in the wind. No one is following this stuff very closely...but they're also not hearing any sort of message from the democrats....oh wait...I'm sure the judiciary hearings will be a blast for the public. Well only if there's a long don silver story....

[Zensea]

61. All that really matters is what happens after the indictments

I'm no fan of Vislack or the DLC, but just the same this chicken little stuff about Democratic responses at this stage of the game disgusts me.

The real action is going to happen once this stuff goes to court.

All the Republican apologism and Democratic ineptitude aren't going to matter one bit if Fitzgerald and the grand jury hand down indictments and get convictions of some of these clowns.

[Dr Fate]

74. The court of public opinion is still the highest in the land.

Spin & talking points DO matter when it comes to winning anything in 2006 or '08.

Waiting for Repubs to fall on their own sword NEVER works.

[Zensea]

76. True, but I did say After the indictments...

Before the indictments, all the talk is just talk.
After the indictments (if they occur) if the Democrats don't grab the ball to court public opinion then I will be pissed.
And if the indictments Don't occur, I'm afraid that no matter how good the talk up until then, it won't make much difference.

So, I am somewhat in agreement with you on this subject, though I may not have made that clear.

I also think that if the indictments do occur, it's not going to matter much how much spin the Republican apologists have been churning out, if anything I can easily picture a scenario where it will backfire on them big time especially if Fitzgeral has a strong case & my instinct tells me that he does.

[Dr Fate]

77. Okay- I'll buy that for a dollar. n/t

n/t

[Kazak]

62. Won't amount to a hill'a'beans once the indictments come...

:thumbsup:

[IndianaGreen]

63. Vilsak is DLC

The DLC wants to rule in coalition with Republicans. The DLC advocates foreign and economic policies that are similar to what the GOP advocates.

Why would the new DLC Chair be presented to the TV audience as representing views of typical Democrats. The rank and file is pissed at Bush, it is not interested in accommodation, like the DLC is.

[David Zephyr]

71. I thought that the author of this thread was pro-DLC.

What's up now?

[dolstein]

92. Hate to point this out, but this has nothing to do with the DLC

This is a party-wide problem. The Democratic Party doesn't have a discplined message operation like the Republican Party does. So when we don't have a Democratic president who can command the bully pulpit and "speak for the party", we're screwed.

The Republican Party generates talking points and has a cadre of surrogates (many from within Congress) who take to the airwaves and repeat those talking points.

Talking points + disciplined media surrogates = message. The Republicans understand this. Apparently, the Democrats -- from left-wing to centrist -- don't.

[burrowowl]

64. The Black Caucus should propose somebody

to help Dean with the Democratic Party, they have SPINE!
and the DLC should be deep-sixed!

[Robeson]

82. How I miss Ron Brown. He was a total Pro.

[enough already]

69. I thought Mehlman handed Podesta his lunch yesterday too

At one point Podesta essentially admitted that the Clinton admin. were liars. I mean, is the BEST we can do? We are starting to LOSE the spin battle on what should be a slam dunk win for us. Unreal.

[LittleClarkie]

72. Why is their defense of leaking Plame's identity to attack Wilson?

I don't get that. We're not talking about what they don't like about Wilson. We're talking about what they did to Valerie Plame. Period.

[blm]

75. Mehlman got his talking points to his soldiers. Dean needs to do the same.

But, Dems are hampered by the fact that they wait for the facts to come in from the legal department. Repubs show confidence in their lies because they know they need to get the lie out there or perish.

Lying IS their life. Gathering the facts takes time and a clearer conscience.

[Andromeda]

79. Republicans are more adept at lying...

than Democrats are. They've used trickery, subterfuge and deceit for years and they've honed it to an art form. They've needed to tell lies to win elections and have been so effective at cheating and smearing opponents that it's part of their nature.

To them, the ends justifies the means.

We don't need dishonest Democrats to counter them---we just need spokespeople who can deliver effective rebuttal. We must stop being "nice" and we must stop trying to appease them. We need to hit them hard and often and when they are down, we need to kick them---hard. (I'm speaking figuratively.)

Until we learn how to do that we will continue to lose elections.

[Edgewater_Joe]

86. God, Would I Love A Dean/Mehlman Confrontation!

Wonder who'd yell after THAT one?!

[dolstein]

88. You've got to be kidding -- Dean would get crushed

Mehlman is disciplined. Dean isn't. It doesn't matter that Melman is lying and Dean isn't telling the truth. Melman speaks confidently and with authority, he knows going in what points he wants to make, and he makes them. In his TV appearances, Dean always seems unprepared. Sure, he can make valid points, but his arguments are so scattershot that nothing really sticks. Even on those rare occaisions where he has a message, he's easily thrown off.

Look, I don't like Melman. I don't like the things he says. But the guy's an effective advocate for his side. Too many DU'ers are so blinded by their left-wing ideology that they can't recognize how ineffective many liberal talking heads are and how effective their right-wing counterparts are. The Democrats need to have a talented corps of media representatives who can take to the airwaves and deliver a focused message. They don't have that. The Republicans do,and that gap is the difference between elections won and elections lost.

[Edgewater_Joe]

89. I'd Put My Condo On Dean

Mehlman's as transparent and as bad a liar as there is out there, and Dean thinks on his feet in ways that would make Mehlman mumble (if mumbling were part of his memorization skill set). Dean also has a sense of humor that Mehlman dreams he had (unless he shows it with GanGuckgonnert).

If you thought Mehlman was decent on MTP this week you're nuts, with all due respect.

I'd put my money where my mouth was, and that's not partisanship, that IS skills.

[yurbud]

91. this is what Howard Dean should be doing for Dems

He's the only one that knows how to speak coherently in public.

Hillbilly Hitler art:



Blog:

[agincourt]

96. The republicans prepare their guys for these shows,

our guys get on without any preparation for these debates and it's obvious. The democrats need to get guys who JUST focus on these TV appearances. Then the trouble is the fuckers probably won't let our people on.

[KoKo]

97. ROFL! Is this a repeat of last week when Mehlman wiped the floor with

Vilsak who's just a DINO in Dem "flip-flops." I'm sorry I missed another disgusting Visac appearance against Mehlman. ONCE was ENOUGH for me!...UGH!