Screen Shot 2018-12-16 at 12.31.37 PM
Your host, PM 'Papa' Carpenter


  • ***


« Yet more handwriting on the wall | Main | Investigative schmestigative »

April 11, 2007


Do you really post at 4:30am? I thought I was the only one who did that....;-)

To the point. I don't wish to engage in the Republican habit of forgiving the poor behavior of "our" people (as so accurately cited in your April 5 'Crackpots on willy-dust' post, PM), but I do wish to say this: while I'm mildly disappointed in some things the Dems have done since January - Carl Levin's remarks about not defunding the war last weekend are a case in point - I also am quite pleased and proud that congressional Democrats are starting to show some spine on a LOT of issues that have lain unaddressed for pretty much all of the past 6 years.

While I don't disagree with the essential subtext of this post, that pussyfooting around on the Iraq issue is never going to be a winning strategy for Dems, I humbly suggest that for once, we on the Left try to subsume our need for instant gratification, and give the poor buggers some time.

I mean, after six years of being effectively shut out of government, and with a freshman class of varying quality (as they all are), are we to ask the new Dem barely-a-majority to fix EVERYthing in two months' time?

Yes, Iraq is an urgent issue, and no one wants all our soldiers home and out of that meatgrinder any quicker than I. But it's not all simply to the Dems' say-so, as should go without saying.

There is a highly-resistant White House and minority party, and there are still such things as Fox News and other rightie media outlets maintaining, as one of their marching morons did last week, that "Americans don't WANT all these investigations." And finally, as you rightly point out, most Americans don't pay ANY attention to these things, and of those who do, a significant number of them pay attention only to Faux Noise.

So yes, the Dems need to be careful not to get lured into the "we can't be beat in '08" trap. But perhaps we can give them a little bit of time?

I may weaken my own argument with this last observation, but articles such as yours, in which a devotedly leftist writer is, this early in the game, criticizing the Dems for not having the answers to all the world's problems in the first two or three months, only serves as ammunition for the Foxites who already believe that sort of thing, and live only to see that folks like us do too.

Other than that, very nice column.

I'll tell what folderpoll the DEM "leaders" can expect from 2008 independents: flocking to Tancredo. At least he can secure our borders against illegals, including the terrorists and weaponry embedded among them; attacking US civilization!

PM, is Vic one of your regular trolls, or did he just drop by special to make a senseless remark for my benefit, since I'm new to your site?

Vic, you poor scared little mousie of an alleged man...I feel so sorry for you. If you think Tancredo can or will protect anything other than himself, if you think he's anything more than a blowhard riding in the back of a political bandwagon, then there's nothing to be said for you. I wish you luck with those demons you're clearly fighting.

Actually was just repsonding to PMs last paragraph of DEM folding and polling; but now that it's brought up, as a 37 year veteran on the DEM frontline, I can sure recognize a case of trench mouth when I encounter it.

This poll is way too early and far too shallow in its inquiries to make it meaningful regarding what happens in 2008.

This article astutely points out that the future of elections in America belong to Independents to determine. But, Independents are growingly voting on results, and with just over 100 days of Dem's being in charge of Congress, results are still meager and hard to come by.

As for depth or shallowness of the poll, they didn't ask those disappointed Dems and Indies if their disappointment is at the steps Dem's have taken, or the lack of results of those steps to date.

Additionally, in 2008, there will be the comparison test. If I vote for an incumbent will anything improve? If the answer is no, then Dem's have a problem. On the other hand, what voter who voted Republican incumbents out of office in 2006, can justify voting Republicans back in, in 2008?

There is a lot of road to cover before the 2008 election, and the GDP numbers for later this year are predicted to be down around 2%. If that decline in our economy has any staying power, voters will vote their pocketbooks and job security, and that tends to be a pretty independent voting block as well as an anti-incumbent one.

The comments to this entry are closed.