Chris Andersen's blog

"[The] idea that we’re going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong,” -- Howard Dean

"One can't doubt that the American objective in Iraq has failed." -- William F. Buckley

Two recommendations:

• Chris Bowers has a harsh but fundamentally correct assessment of the blogosphere's actions to the Alito confirmation: it was more reactive then proactive.

• Georgia10 lays out a plan for being more proactive on the Domestic Spying scandal.

Many have criticized the leadership for not doing much on Alito until the last week. But most of us didn't do all that much either. Chris Bowers points out that he wrote several posts leading up to the confirmation hearings, most of which garnered only a trickle of responses. It wasn't until John Kerry signalled his plan to push for a fillibuster that the blogosphere's campaign for the same really took off. So was the failure to stop Alito really just a failure of leadership?

I'd like to pass on another framing suggestion. It comes from Ned Lamont, the erstwhile primary opponent to Joe Lieberman who, in a recent event (described in this MyDD diary), described two things that led him to consider entering the race: The Alaska "Bridge to Nowhere" and Bush's "War to Nowhere", Iraq.

I think the "Road to Nowhere" frame is an excellent way of describing the failings of the Republican agenda, both domestically and internationally. It creates a single image that ties both failures together and presents a concrete image of a bridge (a huge engineering feat) that serves no purpose other than to line the pockets of Republican supporters with taxpayer dollars.

"Health Segregation Accounts"

There's an excellent item up today on Bush's next great plan to help out America. Health Savings Accounts.

I suggest that we preempt this latest bamboozlepalooza tour by calling them what they really are: Health Segregation Accounts.

After all, that's what will happen. The sick and old will be segregated from the young and healthy. The latter will consider themselves lucky that they don't have to be pooled together with those sick people. Until they themselves become sick. Then they will come crawling back to Uncle Sam demanding that he do something to help them out.

And who profits from all this?

I agree 100% with the frustrations of Democrats who are upset with our leadership for putting up such an ineffectual fight against the Alito nomination. But those who advocate shucking the whole party because of failed leadership are advocating the worst possible solution.

You want the party to change? Then make it change! Work to get people elected who will act like leaders.

There is a lot of dead weight in our party. But that dead weight won't miraculously turn into leadership if you threaten it with walking away.

Why?

Because the biggest problem with our leadership is that they are afraid. If you try to make them change by threatening them then you are only compounding their fear.

We want leaders who aren't afraid. Leaders who aren't afraid of the Republicans. Leaders who aren't afraid of the media. Leaders who aren't afraid of our country's enemies.

Peter Daou really gets the heart of the problem the Democrats face right now.

The tools for Democratic victory are there, its just that there is little sign of a will on the part of Democrats to actually use those tools to their fullest extent. This is either because they don't understand what is available to them or, more likely, they have been cowed into not taking up arms when it is necessary.

Fortunately, Peter does more than diagnose the problem. He gives a prescription for how Democrats could use those tools if they were willing to take up arms. The list is specific to the Alito case (and, as such, is an example of 20-20 hindsight), but it could easily be adapted to any future battles we might have:

Wil Weaton (of Wesley Crusher fame) has a long and thoughtful post on dKos that is a followup to an article he wrote for Salon just prior to Christmas. In the article, Wil talks about a blowup his father had with him about the death penalty. Wil wrote the article as a way of dealing with his feelings over the incident and his anger with the way that the polarizing nature of our current political debate has destroyed his ability to talk with his parents about the most pressing issues of the day.

Unfortunately, in the course of writing his original article, Wil painted a picture of his parents that made them out to be wingnuts just like the people he was decrying. The post on dKos describes his subsequent conversations with his parents about the article and how it hurt them. It is a useful (albeit LONG) excursion into an experience that, unfortunately, far too many Americans are experiencing today.