Today, two nationally known bloggers have put forth the idea that unless Democrats make this the central message:
making the case that Iraq is not, as Bush continues to claim, the centerpiece of the war on terror, and has, in fact, compromised America's ability to combat terrorists and protect our homeland.
of 2006 and beyond they will continue to lose. Doom is predicted for the upcoming elections.
Well, I hope they're wrong.
First of all, i just wanted to point out that while Dems are not making this the one central issue of the 2006 campaign, the point itself has not gone missing.
Joe Biden has made this point repeatedly on talk shows and in press releases geared towards moderates. The Bush Admin has made america less safe.
Howard Dean has made this point repeatedly on talk shows and speeches targetted at the base. The Bush Admin has made America less safe.
Someone most of us hate has even written a book....
http://www.amazon.com/...
...
that not only makes this point:
making the case that Iraq is not, as Bush continues to claim, the centerpiece of the war on terror, and has, in fact, compromised America's ability to combat terrorists and protect our homeland.
but argues very convincingly that Liberals will do a much better job. Which they will.
(I know a lot of people are still smarting over the case Beinart made for Iraq and how he made that case, but the fact remains, the topic of Beinart's book is exactly what Kos and Arianna want dems talking about. Hate the guy, but that's the topic of the book.)
So lets just get a little perspective first of all. It's not like the point isn't being made nationally by well known democrats. It is. It is and it's a crystal clear point they're driving home to at least one American. If not to Kos and Arianna.
Now if you're not already perturbed by this Diary, and you haven't already started shaking your head muttering to yourself: "he just doesn't get it, he just doesn't get," you will now.
Here's the thing. I hope Arianna and Kos are wrong... cause if Kos and Arriana are right. Then Lamont will lose too.
Because while I have heard Lamont make similiar observations:
making the case that Iraq is not, as Bush continues to claim, the centerpiece of the war on terror, and has, in fact, compromised America's ability to combat terrorists and protect our homeland.
That is not the central thrust of the Lamont campaign. The central thrust of the Lamont campaign is summed up best in the latest Lamont ad.
http://www.dailykos.com/...
which doesn't argue that Joe Lieberman supports policies domestically and overseas that make america less safe. Which would be a truthful, honest and a convincing argument to make. Cause Joe Lieberman does support policies domestically and overseas that make america less safe.
It argues that Joe Lieberman is a "turncoat", a bad democrat for choosing to run as an independent after losing the primary. Which is also true, and a convincing argument, but that does not make the point that Kos and Arianna believe we need to be making in order to win.
I decided to check the Lamont campaign website to see if I'm wrong about what the central focus of the Lamont campaign is:
http://nedlamont.com/
I am running for the US Senate because we deserve a Senator who will stand up for Connecticut and stand up for our progressive democratic values. Rather than spending hundreds of millions of dollars a day in Iraq, it is time for America to refocus on issues back home: fixing our health care system, upgrading our schools, and rebuilding our aging infrastructure. We will start winning in Iraq as the Iraqis take control of their own destiny, just as America has to start investing again in our own future.
nothing there about Bush is making america less safe. Maybe less economically secure. Some stuff there about how spending too much in Iraq is taking away from American infrastructure. Sounds like an economic issue to me.
If you check the issue tab and click on Iraq you get:
Today, America is no safer, Israel is no safer, Iran is more dangerous, Osama bin Laden is still at large, and our brave troops are stuck in the middle of a bloody civil war.
so maybe I'm wrong. Maybe that's the central focus of the Lamont campaign. If so, it's not what I hear through the MSM AND the blogosphere filter. Sorry kids but I just don't feel like an asshole for pointing out something that would be celebrated and re-inforced in a thousand diaries: The Lamont campaign is not about policy decisions, it's about Joe Lieberman's behavior.
Now of course it could be argued that the CT election is a special case, and the advice given by Kos and Arianna doesn't apply there. Well, isn't that nice? "Democrats are going to lose if they don't take my advice in every other election but the election that means the most to the netroots??"
Maybe so. Maybe so.
I no longer have a stake in the CT race. I've noted elsewhere that it has evolved into a re-inforcement of something that I am convinced hurts the party short term and long term. Intellectually, as a strict practical matter, Lamont would do a much better job as a CT Senator than Lieberman would do. But now that the Lamont campaign has taken to hiring people who argue that the Clinton Global Initiative is nothing more than a vanity project, I've lost any sort of real enthusiasm for the Lamont campaign.
Feel free to see this diary through that filter if you want. I'm just applying the advice given to the Dems by well known bloggers to the Lamont campaign and trying to determine whether or not it measures up.
The thing is. We can hit the repugs on both fronts: Economy and Making America Less Safe. Seems to me they're not even totally independent issues anyway.
I see no reason to choose. But is it important to apply whatever advice we give -- and whatever self-fulfilling prophecies of doom and gloom that go with it -- evenly across ALL democratic party campaigns this year? Probably not.
If Lamont loses will it occur to anyone that maybe we should not have focussed so much on Joe Lieberman's betrayal of us personally, but more on the policies that Joe Lieberman supports that have, indeed, imperiled this great country?
Some stuff to think about?