Cold, hard definition of democratic "success" in the next 2 years

[Parisle]

----Okay,.. the 2006 midterms went very well for us, but the White House in 2008 is still "the prize." Gaining the White House while keeping both houses of Congress would be "our trifecta." What we do between now and then must be part of a pragmatic 2008 gameplan,.. and not an impetuous, idealistic end zone dance over 2006. (As an engineer charged with "making things work," I despise untoward idealism. The plan is the only ideal for the present time. Period.)

----I worry that democrats are so in love with their traditional agenda items that they might forsake or neglect the need for a well-thought-out plan for 2008, in favor of a bunch of hysterical, knee-jerk initiatives aimed simultaneously at all their pet concerns and constituencies. If that should happen, good-bye 2008. Just carefully examine the 2006 results and plan accordingly.

----There are two components to political success in today's negative political atmosphere. One of these is that you have to do something good,... but more importantly, you must avoid doing anything bad, and there is no better confirmation of this latter point than the 2006 results. Positive accomplishments will usually garner mildly positive reactions, but scandal, corruption and policy screw-ups and failures will get you devoured. The democrats' first imperative in a 2008 gameplan must be, "No mistakes. No fumbles. No penalties." Squeaky clean has to be the inviolate rule. No surprises.

----Let me say that again. For the sake of 2008, avoiding mistakes is actually more important than achieving any positive outcome of any issue-initiative you might be considering. And once you have that imperative firmly in mind,.. keep the wish-list at a manageable and coherent level. Set some priorities and keep them within reach, and consistent with the overall plan. Maverick, publicity-minded committee chairmen not wanted. And the beauty of this reasoning is that as long as you keep your noses clean, then you don't have to accomplish but so much in order to stay on good terms with the electorate. Think about that very carefully. It may sound like a repudiation of idealism, but it is really only a pragmatic deferral of idealism until the time is a little more ripe,.. the stage more invitingly set. It's only two years, eh? Metaphorically speaking, we are still in a "lifeboat" where the economy and foreign policy are concerned; this is no time to be sounding off about gun control or the spotted owl. Political survival rules the day, and fractional constituencies have to understand that.

----The Minimum Wage increase is an outstanding place to begin. It's do-able. A bill can be passed. If necessary to avoid a brawl, punt on the $7.25 target and go with $6.50. That's still a $234/month increase for the working poor and, while not optimum, it would nevertheless represent a sufficient achievement to secure your standing during this all-important 2-year interval. That, along with riding herd on the disentanglement from Iraq, should be a full plate for you. Taxes and the deficit would be the only other major issue that I would raise much of a howl about. Let the little stuff slide.


----About investigations and impeachment: Low profile. The trash-talking gunslinger approach to the impeachment question is a good example of this. After all that has been said about the Bush pattern of "fixing intelligence around policy," you'd think that democrats knew enough not to say, "We're gonna impeach your ass, and we're gonna hold all these investigations to accomplish it." Better to quietly hold investigations, and let impeachable offenses emerge. It isn't even necessary to ever utter the word, "impeachment." Let the process simply take you there. Act surprised and disillusioned when it does. The spirit of vendetta and retribution do not wear well with the public over time.

----Also,.. the investigatory process should be coordinated and sequenced for best possible results. Go for the Cheney Energy Panel meetings first,... then maybe segueway into Halliburton profiteering, etc. Don't just immediately go after Rove,.. the Plame affair,.. the manipulated pre-war intelligence, etc. Again, let the process take you there. This approach minimizes your chances of a mis-step,.. maximizes the other side's chances of screwing up or being ratted out,... and makes it easier for the public to digest and understand. And yes,... there are about a hundred investigations which ought to be launched,... so don't put the public in an investigatory coma.

----Things suck now,... and they're still going to suck in 2008. We can't change that all at once, nor should we try. But a mere two successful policy initiatives in two years,... and no screw-ups, and the White House is ours. I guarantee it.

[AlinPA]

1. We should really get the Medicare Part D / Health care thing tee'd up for 2008.

We can get the R's on their heels if is done right.

[Vincardog]

2. To win in 08 the Democrats need to Reinstate the FAIRNESS DOCTRINE

and force the states to have Open Transparent elections along with Random audits of Paper Ballots.

IT would be nice to see them advance the plan to have public financing of elections along with free air time for true debates.

They should push for $10 mw and settle for $7.50

They should push for universal health care, full employment at a living wage and stop the FAST TRACK trade BS.

[Parisle]

3. Remember,.. we're just talking about the next two years,...

---- ....but I would agree with you that another initiative worth tackling in that time frame would be the "audit trail" of the election process. The public is completely onboard with that,....

[Vincardog]

4. audit trail is not Ballot Of Record. I am talking about the first 100 Days,

[Senator]

5. There's nothing to "investigate"

You want "cold, hard"? You're saying the minimum wage is more important than ongoing war crimes.

The regime admits and "defends" clearly impeachable offenses -- like illegal spying and violating Geneva.

The "investigations" question is whether to hold "impeachment hearings" or "open-ended fact-finding hearings" on specific matters (that may or may not lead to impeachment charges).

Doing the former (while not even "required") could well be helpful to bringing more of the public (already a majority) and even Republicans back into the reality-based community where impeachment is imperative to defend the Constitution and begin to Redeem Our National Soul. Doing the latter displays weakness and sends the message that there is some uncertainty about the ongoing reality that is staring us in the face.

That is why the "off the table" comment is so damaging. It is a self-defeating prophesy regardless of whether or not there's some "strategery" behind it.

If you don't broach the accusation, you garner zero attention.

Impeachment IS our positive agenda.

It is our ONLY moral, patriotic option.

===

[Parisle]

6. Calm down, Senator...

---- I want impeachment as much as you do, and I assure you that MY idea of justice in sentencing would trump yours any day,.. and would extend to no fewer than 30-40 individuals, both in and out of government. Ok? That much said, I suggest you re-read what I wrote. You didn't get it the first time.

[Senator]

9. I see ... the "low profile" thing

While I admit I probably don't focus as much on "revenge justice in sentencing" as you seem to, it's only because I'm more concerned about the morality of our side than that of the war criminals.

I also have trouble imagining a "lower profile" than talk of minimum wage or political advantage in '08 when there is ongoing torture and war crimes being conducted in our name. Your mileage may vary.

And I did "get it the first time." It's just more fear-based Rationalizing for Inaction. Another prescription for manipulating the public, rather than trusting them with reality -- an abdication of leadership.

But maybe I'm just not smart or calm enough to see the wisdom of such strategery.

--

[Parisle]

13. Ok,... I'll be happy with successful impeachment proceedings,..

---- But even with a unanimous democratic verdict in the senate, we're still going to need 10 or 11 votes from the republicans. Which ones do you feel will join in convicting?

[Senator]

18. Well, not that that's relevant but...

And I do mean it is irrelevant to our side making the moral choice we must. And also irrelevant on a strategic/logical basis in that it makes no sense to only fight battles you are certain to win.

But I'm not without cautious optimism in that regard either. Warner, McCain, and Graham have already stood publicly against the "War Criminals Protection Act." Collins stood with them, albeit without their more obvious gravitas. Arlen Specter has already publicly scoffed at the "defenses" offered to the illegal spying. The remaining Senators I consider "rational" are Snowe, Hagel, and Lugar. And beyond that is a barrel full of the swing-staters and the most craven (Shelby, Hatch, Stevens) who are probably already polling it in their states.

The political reality though is that it only takes a few to render their option to "defend the indefensible" untenable. Once ranks are broken, the "partisan paint brush" goes dry, and it's pretty much every one for themselves.

--

[orpupilofnature57]

10. kick! Impeachment is the only way to communicate to the World and

ourselves,that we are not a party to the most Misanthrope administration in American history.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

19. Moral and patriotic or not, it's not an option.

Arguing about whether or not the Democrats *should* impeach Bush is missing the key point - they *can't*, this side of 2008. That would need more Republicans to vote for it than there is any chance whatsoever of happening.

"Impeach Bush" is a slogan, not a policy, and it would (not will, because the Democrats in power have better sense than to be swayed by it) do a great deal of harm and no good whatsoever if the Democrats tried to do it.

Look at any other criminal prosectution service - no prosecution service will prosecute someone, no matter how sure they are of their guilt, unless there's at least some chance of conviction. And for the next two years, there isn't.

[Pragmatic Pilgrim]

7. Send a framed copy of your post to all our Dems

in Congress, Parisle. Better yet, tattoo it on the backs of their hands, so they can't forget to bring it along to committee meetings and floor votes.

All in all, it's a winning strategy...even though it may not give some of our site's firebrands the adrenaline rush they'd like.

Thanks for expressing my own convictions so crisply and succinctly.

[Parisle]

11. Thanks, Pilgrim

---- I must admit,.. I had higher hopes for that post, but that's how things go, I guess... As for the DU's "firebrands," let me say that if the democrats had 60 seats in the senate, then I might be a little more aggressive about the matter of impeachment, as well. It is undoubtedly well-deserved.

[w4rma]

8. $7.50 is the target on the minimum wage. And I doubt there will be much of a brawl. (nt)

[alfredo]

12. The conservative media is trying to build up expectations

in hope of declaring the Dems as failures if they do not meet their inflated expectations.

[Parisle]

14. That much should go without saying,....

----The democrats can hardly expect to get as good an accounting from the media as the republicans have been getting,... nor as much slack cut for them, either. Bush can tell an outright and obvious lie ("I don't know Ken Lay") and he gets a free pass on it,... the media looks the other way. But with any assertion made by a democrat, and to which a republican objects,.. why then one may expect the objecting republican to receive the more favorable press. The post I started with here was, in some ways, a warning about how to pre-handle the pitfalls of "inflated expectations." Let's not be our own worst enemy, eh? That's what Bush has done and, as a result, the democrats now control congress.

[alfredo]

15. It does appear the Reps are going to disrupt and delay not

out of concern over the effects of specific legislation, but out of the desire to return to power.

[AngryAmish]

16. The cleansing of all Rethulikkans from the US

[wwmills551]

17. Love your post!