Category: Democrats

Pass it On.

“You are the heirs of one of the country’s great traditions — the progressive movement that started late in the l9th century and remade the American experience piece by piece until it peaked in the last third of the 20th century…Its aim was to keep blood pumping through the veins of democracy when others were ready to call in the mortician…While the social dislocations and meanness that galvanized progressives in the 19th century are resurgent, so is the vision of justice, fairness, and equality. That’s a powerful combination if only there are people around to fight for it. The battle to renew democracy has enormous resources to call upon – and great precedents for inspiration.”

By way of a friend of mine, Bill Moyers recounts the Progressive Story of America. The whole thing’s worth a read…and I for one think it’s great to hear the Progressives get their due. (Along the same lines, this month’s Prospect has a special report entitled “A New Progressive Era?”, with contributions from, among others, Sean Wilentz, James MacGregor Burns, and John Podesta.) Progressives take a lot of flak in the Academy, some justified (they were silent on lynching and generally really lousy on race), some not (ridiculous amounts of ink has been spilled lambasting them for being middle-class, bureaucratic, and/or unSocialist.)

Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap.

With visions of the 2000 primary perhaps dancing in his head, John McCain asks the White House to repudiate the recent Swift Boat Veterans garbage. (Naturally, they didn’t.) The real ugliness begins.

Born in the USA.

A few days out of date now, but still worth reading: Bruce Springsteen on the need for regime change. “It is through the truthful exercising of the best of human qualities – respect for others, honesty about ourselves, faith in our ideals – that we come to life in God’s eyes. It is how our soul, as a nation and as individuals, is revealed. Our American government has strayed too far from American values. It is time to move forward.”

Follow the Bouncing Ball.

So did Kerry-Edwards get a post-convention bounce or not? Depends on how you spin it, it seems. I’m not too concerned, frankly…I think most people know how they’re going to vote at this point (including the Kerry Republicans.)

Hope is on the way.

Well, other than the over-the-top salute at the very beginning of his remarks, I’d say Kerry knocked it out of the park last night. It was definitely the best speech I’ve ever heard of him give, and one surprisingly full of red meat to lob back at the Bushies. As a result, Kerry seemed energetic and self-assured and, well, presidential throughout. All in all, I thought it a very impressive performance, and one that should help him a great deal in the time between now and the debates, bounce or no.

As for Edwards the night before, I actually thought his speech, despite the nice “Hope is on the Way” refrain, was a bit of a letdown after Obama’s rousing keynote. Edwards seemed to stumble a few times in the middle going, and I found the tone a bit too conversational to produce any really memorable turns of phrase. Still, any other year, I think the Senator’s speech would’ve been one of the highlights of the convention. The fact that it loses some luster when compared to those of Clinton, Obama, and Kerry speaks very highly of the overall quality of this year’s proceedings in Boston.

Speaking of which, I’d say the GOP will be extremely hard-pressed to match the Democrats’ unity, optimism, and energy in a month, particularly with the legions of embittered conservatives in attendance at the Garden. Well, even if they do muster up a fine three-ring circus at the end of August, John Kerry, John Edwards, and the Democrats have proven this week they’re ready for the fight. So bring it on.

2-for-2.

I must say…so far, this is turning out to be one of the more enjoyable Democratic conventions in recent memory. Bill Clinton turned it on on Monday, reminding everyone in America what a truly committed and competent president looks like. And last night was, in the inimitable phrasing of Mo Rocca, Obamatastic! As for the rest of the speeches, the only one that’s rubbed me the wrong way so far is Gore’s, who was his usual pedantic self. Otherwise, everyone seems fired up and on message…now, if only America was watching. (The cable ratings may be up, but I’m willing to bet most of those viewers already know who they’re voting for.)

At any rate, after Clinton and Obama, John Edwards will have two very hard acts to follow tonight, but I’m willing to bet he’s up to the task.

The L Word.

“Conservatives have ‘been working on redefining the word “liberal” for decades, and turning it into a four-letter word…We don’t want to give up the word. We’ve been losing the fight for the definition.’” Sixteen years after Bush I first hammered it into the ground, the Post examines the status of “liberal” as a GOP epithet (and Dem rallying cry.)

…And Pointing the Finger.

Similarly, GOP Senator Pat Roberts covers Dubya’s back by making Tenet the fall guy for the WMD fiasco in the Senate Intelligence Committee report, while preventing any further investigation into White House efforts to arm-twist the CIA into the right conclusions. “‘The Republicans ultimately and effectively, at the end of the day, controlled this investigation. There’s no doubt about it. And they tried to put a bipartisan patina on it, but anybody who accepts that on face value is out of touch,’ said [a] former Democratic aide.”

Onward, Christian Soldiers.

Speaking of Dubya and “shared values,” I neglected to post this earlier, so the links are kinda stale now. (Compounding my bad form, I also forgot where I saw them originally.) Nevertheless, much to the chagrin of many pastors and theologians, the Dubya campaign is leaning heavily on churchgoers to join an ecclesiastical voting army this November. “Even Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s ethics and religious liberty commission and a prominent Bush supporter, recoiled at the idea of churches becoming directly involved in a political campaign. ‘I am appalled,’ Land said in a statement. ‘I suspect that this will rub a lot of pastors’ fur the wrong way…It’s one thing for a church member motivated by exhortations to exercise his Christian citizenship to go out and decide to work on the Bush campaign or the Kerry campaign. It’s another, and totally inappropriate for a political campaign, to ask workers who may be church members to provide church member information through…directories.” Will Karl’s Crusade against Kerry-Edwards falter before it’s even begun?