I was a bit surprised that the political press didn’t comment more last week on the stunning success of the “Burn Bush” netroots fund drive. $125,000 from over 3,200 donors. 14-months before the election. Over a weekend. In August. Unprecedented.
But with the sudden withdrawal of state Sen. Rodney Tom only seven weeks after he jumped into the race, the pundits are starting to take notice. In a brief post on TIME Magazine’s political blog Real Clear Politics, Reid Wilson describes WA-08 as “a great pickup opportunity for Democrats,” but for “one major problem … a competitive primary.”
Well, it turned out not to be much of a problem for Burner after all, and Wilson puts his finger on one of the reasons why:
One source close to Tom said the decision was made all the easier after President Bush came to the state to raise funds for Reichert. During that time, Burner used her credentials with the netroots to attract 3200 new donors, raising more than $125,000 over three days. A Burner strategist said it was conceivable that she could raise as much — or more — than Reichert did from the Bush visit. Tom raised about $100,000 in a month, though the source admitted Tom couldn’t compete with Burner’s national fundraising potential.
That’s pretty much also the lede from the Associated Press, which credits Burner’s “Internet-fueled” campaign for her “early victory.” And in the Seattle Times, Tom himself puts it quite bluntly:
“You have thousands of people giving twenty, thirty bucks. It’s how campaigns should be run.”
Absolutely.
It may be premature to say that the rules have changed, but there is no doubt they are changing. New technologies now enable progressive candidates with broad netroots support to run a “people-powered” campaign capable of matching a handful of rich folks dollar for dollar. And by so effectively merging the old campaign paradigms with the new, Darcy Burner is fast becoming a model for congressional candidates nationwide.
How did she do it? That’s what a number of bloggers and congressional campaign staffers have asked me after the stunning success of Burner’s virtual town hall and netroots fund drive, and our conversations always seem to devolve into the same question: “Who is handling Burner’s netroots outreach?” But unfortunately for those hoping to quickly replicate formula, the disappointing truth is… nobody. Burner has no “netroots outreach.” The netroots are an integral part of her campaign.
You could almost say that Burner has “gone native,” except that would wrongly imply some sort of personal transformation. In fact Burner has always been smart, driven, progressive, passionate, technically savvy, and well… a bit of a geek who famously installed the phone system herself in her first campaign office. Burner is the netroots, except rather than just blogging about politics and contributing money, Burner decided she could make more of a difference by running for office herself. And had the local and national netroots been as mature two years ago as they are today, I’m pretty damn sure Burner would be running for reelection right now rather than Reichert.
Now, I know there are some, like Democratic state Rep. Deb Eddy, who worry that Burner’s close identity with the netroots might be as much a liability as it is an asset:
Primaries bring out the party faithful, said Eddy, and “Darcy was more left wing than [Tom] is.”
However, the 8th District, which stretches from Duvall to Eatonville, is not as liberal as Burner is, Eddy said, and that could spell trouble in a race against Reichert. While Burner is popular among left-leaning bloggers, that may not translate to the average voter.
“One thing that worries me is she has not naturally gravitated to more nuanced positions,” Eddy said. “Sometimes it’s hard to get perspective or distance from the net roots. They can create a lot of smoke.”
Hmm. The “Burn Bush” campaign generated fire, not smoke; that’s what drove Tom so quickly out of the race. And if Eddy is going to lazily adopt the Republican frame that Burner is somehow out of touch with her district, perhaps she could explain exactly what it is about Burner (and us “left-leaning bloggers”) that is “too liberal”?
Is it “too liberal” to fight for a responsible close to our occupation of Iraq? Is it “too liberal” to support reproductive rights, and the civil rights of all citizens regardless of race, creed, gender and sexual preference? Is it “too liberal” to oppose warrantless wiretapping, torture and suspension of habeas corpus? Is it “too liberal” to offer a quality public education to all our children and affordable health care to all Americans? Is it “too liberal” to consistently oppose drilling in ANWR, to accept the scientific consensus on evolution and climate change, and to reject estate tax repeal?
According to opinion polls and recent initiative tallies, Burner is smack dab in the mainstream of 8th CD voters on these and many other issues, and while I’m sure there must be some issues on which at least a slight majority of district voters side more with Reichert than with Burner, none immediately come to mind. If Burner were so liberal, so out of touch with the needs of her district, she had the perfect opportunity to prove it during a recent live chat on the progressive blog FireDogLake, where she was all but begged to pander to the audience on the issue of H1B visas. She refused. So in the future, when Eddy publicly frets that Burner is “too liberal” for the district, reporters might want to ask Eddy for some specific examples before repeating the claim unsupported. And it is ironic that Eddy would accuse Burner of not gravitating toward more “nuanced positions” when it is not at all clear from her comments that Eddy has studied Burner’s positions at all.
The fact is, it is Reichert who is out of touch with his constituents, who is too conservative for his district on Iraq, on FISA, on children’s health care, on reproductive rights, on Social Security reform, on estate tax repeal and on any number of high profile issues. It is Reichert who refuses to address climate change because the overwhelming scientific consensus somehow threatens his political ideology or religion or both. It is Reichert who only four years ago — in the wake of the invasion of Iraq — was recruited by both parties, yet chose to be a Republican.
Burner’s critics routinely accuse her of being “too liberal,” while never offering a single example to back up their claim, and yet Reichert is demonstrably outside the mainstream of 8th CD voters on issue after issue after issue… not the least of which being his almost sycophantic support of our profoundly unpopular president and his disastrous occupation of Iraq. By comparison to Reichert, Burner may indeed be liberal, but then by that measure, so is the 8th CD.
Last year Karl Rove and the Reichert campaign (with the active cooperation of the Seattle Times editorial board) were somewhat successful at defining Burner, simply by calling her names. This time around it won’t be so easy. Burner is better, smarter, and more experienced than she was two years ago, and so are the netroots who have her back. We’ve already seen everything the other side has to offer, but they clearly have no idea how to parry the growing strength of our people-powered movement. As Burner stated in a recent video, “There are more of us than there are of them.” And in electoral politics, that’s ultimately all that matters.
Having met and talked with Darcy, I will attest that the image some may get that she is virtual is not true!!
Seriously Goldy, it is importnat, I think, that the netroots aspect not be overdone. Darcy is not a geek, she is a bright,.determined, pol ..and that ain’t bad!
“Last year Karl Rove and the Reichert campaign (with the active cooperation of the Seattle Times editorial board) were somewhat successful at defining Burner, simply by calling her names. This time around it won’t be so easy.”
Last year’s nastiness (he did actually use a “dumb blonde” joke as a CAMPAIGN AD!) will look trivial by comparison to next year’s mudfest. The Times’ editorial writers have their marching orders, to destroy anyone who’d condemn the Blethen children to starvation via the estate tax. The corporate media will give Rep. Reichert every possible benefit of the doubt, whilst simultaneously amplifying every possible problem with Burner. (A responsible press would examine every candidate and ballot initiative closely, of course.) We’ll have to double our efforts, just to counter that tide of character assassination. Oh yeah, we’ll have to discuss issues as well; it’s not like Rep. Reichert or his supporters have any interest in so doing.
SeattleJew: I asked SeattleDan the same question in another thread, What are her qualifications? Why is she sooooooooooo superior to Dave Reichert? What has she done politically to endear her to potential voters? Why should people vote for her?
You Moe-ronic Moonbat!s all talk about the negatives of Dave Reichert. Yet, you can’t define Darcy Moonbat! without Dave Reichert in the same sentence or paragraph. Where are the positives of Darcy Moonbat!? Show me the document!
For example, we had plenty to describe John Effin Kerry in 2004. We have plenty to define Hilary Cliton in 2008. Why? There are voluminous political statements made by both over the years. All Darcy Moonbat! talks about is…?
I’m still waiting to view what she thinks besides the standard Democratic National Committee boilerplate talking points I posted weeks ago. She’s still an empty suit, hanging on Nancy Face Pelosi’s coattails.
ASSIE Voice: Too conservative on FISA?
Your congressional Moonbat! Donk friends recently renewed it in August!
What if Darcy got money only from the 8th? No Emily’s list, no Queen Anne HIll money?
she fares well only cuz of non district excitement over another plain woman in a pantsuit. She completes the lefty trifecta of Hillary/Patty/Darcy
Since Darcy Moonbat! is claiming NutRoots financial support, what is her position on Norman Hsu and his fund raising tactics for Hilary and the Donk Gang?
How does Darcy Moonbat! feel about FISA?
Does Darcy Moonbat! feel the same way as Senator Tennis Shoes about Osama Bin Laden?
Maybe Darcy Moonbat! can form an opinion after reading about Hsu ere:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....OS10B5.DTL
Does Darcy Moonbat! feel we caused 9/11/01?
Does Darcy Moonbat! feel the towers were brought down by an inside explosive job?
Your congressional Moonbat! Donk friends recently renewed it in August!
That’s why their approval rating is at like 10%.
@10
Does Darcy Moonbat! feel we caused 9/11/01?
Does Darcy Moonbat! feel the towers were brought down by an inside explosive job?
If this is all you’ve got, Darcy doesn’t have much to worry about.
PuddyMoron: Darcy Burner has a brain unlike Sheriff Hairspray who you’d vote for at the drop of a hat.
The more stoopid (Reichert) and corrupt (Hastings) and greedy (McGavick) the pol, the more you like him. Once he puts an “R” next to his name – it seals the deal.
THAT is the Puddybud and Wrongon criteria.
@8
Does Darcy Moonbat! feel the same way as Senator Tennis Shoes about Osama Bin Laden?
Yeah, they both think it’s pathetic that we haven’t caught him yet…
How could I forget the ultimate qualification for Puddybud:
a hypocrite (Craig).
Nothing lights Puddybud’s fire like holier than thou.
The questions in Post #10 revolve around Moonbat!tic postulations from ASSIE Voice minions in bygone days.
I would like to see what Darcy Moonbat! thinks about what her “supporters” think.
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
Clueless masquerading as YLB finger-belched: PuddyMoron: Darcy Burner has a brain unlike Sheriff Hairspray who you’d vote for at the drop of a hat.
The more stoopid (Reichert) and corrupt (Hastings) and greedy (McGavick) the pol, the more you like him. Once he puts an “R” next to his name – it seals the deal.
I rest my case. The seventh word in his first sentence has Reichert in it. You can’t articulate a Darcy Moonbat! support position without Reichert in it!
Thanks Clueless
Waaaa haaaa haaa haaa haaaa haaa haaa haaaa haaa haaa haaaa haaa haaa haaaa haaa haaa
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
@22
Yeah, and the reason for that is not because they’re too far to the left, it’s because they’re not taking on Bush and ending this war quickly enough.
@21
The war is not “lost”. The war is over. It’s an occupation now. And the occupation is causing Americans to be killed daily, not reaching any of its goals, strengthening anti-American radicals, helping Iran immensely, and costing us billions. Americans overwhelming support withdrawal at this point, both Republicans and Democrats.
@19
Remember Senator Tennis Shoes said about Osama and roads and schools…?
Yeah, not half as stupid as anything Reichert has said about fighting terrorism.
@18
We’re dealing with a decision here between two people. Darcy Burner is a great candidate, but the reason that I, and many others, are so motivated to help her win is because Dave Reichert is such a dangerously incompetent person to have in that seat. I won’t hide that. It’s the truth. Some people simply don’t have the mental chops to be in Congress.
@16
Um, yeah, I’ll encourage Darcy to put out an official press release saying that she doesn’t follow the 9/11 Truth crazy-town express movement. Hopefully that’ll clear up your confusion, you buffoon.
“This time around it won’t be so easy. Burner is better, smarter, and more experienced than she was two years ago”
Don’t you mean 9 months ago?
let’s see, what has DB done in 9 months that would put her “closer” to the voters in the 8th?
Nothing…
It’s a credit to the national activist “netroots” that raised 100K+ for Burner, but you could have put Donald Duck in there instead of DB with the same results…
The only thing that has happened for Burner in 9 months is that she has gotten closer too, and further embraced the very liberal left netroots. Hardly what a moderate district is looking for…
Puddybud …
Given your vitriol, I see no reason to answer you.
I will instead make on, simple point about ANY Republican candidate in O8.
All patriotic Americans should support realists.
We have ahd seven years of government by fantasy. Decisions have been made not by the clear thinking of economists (such as first Secy of the Treasury) not by generals and diplomats not by scientists and environmentalist but be a naive, ideologically, religiously motivated coterie. Aside from Bush’s obvious limitted intellect, he brought on board a group of nearest advisers who ranged from utter incompetence to isdeologic fanatacism. The few impressive people, ONeil, Powell etc were peripherated and quit or were forced out.
Retribution by Democrats is wrong … bit few … including Darcy … are advocating a witch hunt. Republicans who can not bring themselves to stand up for AMERICA and move forward to repair this damage MUST go.
Look, I an bisexual when it comes to politics. I admire many thigs abut Lieberman and feel Move-on Fucked-up John McCain will always be a hero to me (as will John Kerry). Some democratic policies, esp. protectionism, lowest commn denmnator unionism and blind acceptance of illegal immigrants are, IMHO, as wrong as policies on the right.
I would vote for a good Republican who opposed Sunny Jim, I want someone to run against Gregoire who can show better leadership.
You want my vote? Don’t invite our sad president to speak for you. Don’t support the Discovery Institute or be seen applauding a senile man like Lou Guzzo. Don’t mske stupid French jokes or compoare Bill Clinton’s choice of penis receptacles to Bush’s loss of US standing in the world.
Right Stuff
Darcy has grown, improved her organization and remained firm in her positions. In the eman time our economic, foreign policy and scientific policies have gotten worse,
What has Dave Reichert dine in this time? How would HE reform the Godforsaken Old Party?
@18, @22:
You can measure the fear and loathing on the other side by the number of blind swings their trolls make.
Lee is right. When you look at Reichert’s voting record and listen to him talk, you could vote for any Democrat with any sense. But this isn’t anything new in politics. This sort of situation has been the start of many long, successful, and significant political careers for progressive newcomers. Burner is smarter and shows more promise than any of the candidates I’ve seen for the 8th CD, this decade at least. Microsoft program management (on a project that Microsoft staked its entire future in software development on) is not the same as time in public office, but so what?
For Burner, winning in 08 will be the beginning of the story and not the end.
@24
let’s see, what has DB done in 9 months that would put her “closer” to the voters in the 8th?
Actually, the voters in the 8th are the ones doing the moving. There’s a growing awareness of how dangerous the Republican approach to both domestic governance and foreign policy has been for this country. Burner has gotten better at knowing how to campaign effectively, while the voters of her district are growing more aware of the dangers of putting someone in Congress who is so ideologically in sync with George Bush.
The only thing that has happened for Burner in 9 months is that she has gotten closer too, and further embraced the very liberal left netroots.
The netroots are not “very liberal”. The netroots are an extension of the reality-based community, the folks who were right about Iraq when everyone else was wrong. The folks who have been shining light on government corruption and demanding it get fixed. The folks who are standing up for civil liberties and basic American values. That’s not “very liberal”, that’s patriotic.
Puddystupid: All you need to succeed in any job in life is brains and some streetsmarts.
Burner has more than demonstrated she’s got ’em.
Where did I write I support Senator Craig?
Every single mother f’ing comment you write Puddywhackjob. If it’s got an “R” next to it and its bullshit walks in a right wing bullshit publication or website – you cheerlead for it.
@ 5 righton-
Isn’t it a little hypocritical for you to accuse Darcy of getting money from outside her district when the POTUS just flew into town (on the taxpayers’ dime)and shut down our freeways and part of the airport all so that he could raise money for Reichart from rich conservatives from all over the area… including SEATTLE!
get a clue.
also the RNCC pumping millions of dollars into Reichart’s campaign last cycle would be appropriately labeled as money from outside of his district.
even before the Petraeus report comes out
Naive as usual Puddybud. Petraeus is going to have little to do with that report. It’s going to be just another White House whitewash.
Enough with Puddybud. To all my fellow progressives:
The strategy of the White House all along was to escalate the war until next April at which time they physically can’t sustain the war at that level. Then these bastards will claim credit for bringing down the troop levels to the same point they were last December. That to them is “bringing the troops home”.
They might succeed with this stalling and try like hell to sell this bullshit for political gain but I don’t think it will pay off for them in Nov 2008.
The American people will see through this snow job.
But still, this September, as many Dems as possible should stand up against another supplemental and demand a gradual redeployment of forces effective ASAP.
The Dems who are too cowardly to stand up to Mr. 25 percent should have to face primary challenges in 2008.
@31:
I disagree with this, for two reasons. First, I believe it is possible for a thoughtful Democrat to be willing to let the surge play itself out in an attempt to give the Iraqi government every chance to pull its shit together. That may be because I’m still on the fence about what to do in Iraq. None of the choices are good.
Second, from a strictly political standpoint I don’t think it’s good for the party for Democrats to beat up on each other in the primaries. It is also a fact that the surge will have largely played itself out by the time the primaries come around, so what’s the point of spending the energy on primary challenges.
I believe a much better strategy is to pressure the current incumbents to stand up to the Administration and put energy into increasing the majority in both houses of Congress.
-OM
It’s way past time we for Democratic office holders to stop gravitating toward nuanced positions.
How’s this for a non-nuanced position:
REPUBLICANS SUCK
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
[Deleted — Darryl, see HA Comment Policy]
Poor poor pathetic Puddy, I can give you one of the best reasons to support Darcy, she freaks you radical right wingers so much that you resort to such childish behavior to try and put her down and anyone who can make a radical right winger look even more idiotic than the already are has my vote.
Wrong Stuff”she has gotten closer too”?? Excuse me moron but did you happen to mean closer to? Or are you too stupid to even proofread your own moronic comments before you submit them? Please note the correct usage of to and too in the previous sentence.
Now that the comment police effectuated today’s token deletion of Roger Rabbit posts in order to emphasize their commitment to running a fair and balanced message board, let’s focus on the key factor in the Burner-Reichert rermatch. As impressive as Darcy’s netroots fundraising machine is, nevertheless it’s not Darcy’s greatest asset. Here is what will decide the WA-8 race: DARCY HUGS RABBITS!!!
http://tinyurl.com/opkdy
Eighth district voters have a clear choice before them: Darcy hugs rabbits, and do-nothing congressman Blowdry doesn’t! Either you hug rabbits, or you don’t. It’s that simple. Every rabbit in the 8th C.D. knows who the hugger is, and who hates small furry innocent sweet critters.
Blowdry is toast.
Poor poor pathetic Puddy, I can give you one of the best reasons to support Darcy, she freaks you radical right wingers so much that you resort to such childish behavior to try and put her down and anyone who can make a radical right winger look even more idiotic than they already are has my vote.
Wrong Stuff”she has gotten closer too”?? Excuse me moron but did you happen to mean closer to? Or are you too stupid to even proofread your own moronic comments before you submit them? Please note the correct usage of to and too in the previous sentence.
Had to correct a typo before Wrong Stuff got his panties in a wad.
My question: Why would Deb Eddy use to the press to criticize a fellow democrat running for office?
re 3: “Go fuck yourself, asshole!!” Hunter Thompson
@31
Naive as usual Puddybud. Petraeus is going to have little to do with that report. It’s going to be just another White House whitewash.
It’ll be even less than that now…
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/.....us-report/
@32
I disagree with this, for two reasons. First, I believe it is possible for a thoughtful Democrat to be willing to let the surge play itself out in an attempt to give the Iraqi government every chance to pull its shit together. That may be because I’m still on the fence about what to do in Iraq. None of the choices are good.
I’m convinced at this point that the surge, and our overall military footprint in Iraq, has actually become the biggest impediment to the political progress that needs to be made. Any government coalition that relies on our support becomes de-legitimized by that support. But I’m somewhat with you in that we should be much more concerned about winning the Senate races and flipping more House seats, rather than kicking the Brian Bairds to the curb.
First, I believe it is possible for a thoughtful Democrat to be willing to let the surge play itself out in an attempt to give the Iraqi government every chance to pull its shit together.
It has played itself out. It has failed. The central government is all but collapsed. No Sunni participation and only token Kurd support. The civil war has increased in intensity. The administration has shamelessly moved the goalposts. Now they’re touting that the Sunni sheiks are on their side against Al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia while ignoring that the greatest opposition to the occupation comes from the Sunnis. Once AQM is out of the picture, it’s almost certain the Sunnis will turn on the Americans.
That may be because I’m still on the fence about what to do in Iraq. None of the choices are good.
The “least bad” choice is to choose that many, many fewer Americans come home in body bags and with missing limbs, brain injuries and PTSD warped minds for a war started on total bullshit premises. Come off the fence. The better strategy is to engage in a diplomatic offensive with all the players in the region – even Iran. Not that that will ever happen with the current crowd in the White House.
Second, from a strictly political standpoint I don’t think it’s good for the party for Democrats to beat up on each other in the primaries.
Tell that to the families who have been wrecked by this war. It didn’t seem to hurt us when we challenged Lieberman. Even though we lost that battle, we won the war.
It is also a fact that the surge will have largely played itself out by the time the primaries come around, so what’s the point of spending the energy on primary challenges.
Again, say that to the families most affected by the war. There should be consequences for bad judgment. Brian Baird for example should pay for his flip-flop.
I believe a much better strategy is to pressure the current incumbents to stand up to the Administration and put energy into increasing the majority in both houses of Congress.
I agree we should do this but if the incumbents don’t stand up to Mr. 25 percent in September, there should be consequences.
I keep trying to defend the Democrats over their inability to get it together to stand up to the shrub, but I’m getting really tired of it. There is a serious problem in that a goodly portion of the dems in congress are name-only, and I think there needs to come a time, soon, when more progressive candidates are fielded to replace the moderate publicans running under the dem title.
One thing I think will be a problem is that there will be a significant number of people who were outraged enough to get out and vote last fall that will be discouraged at the failure of the new dem majority to do anything meaningful to address their concerns. In effect, a true backlash. They won’t vote republican, they just won’t vote. That’s long been a liberal shortcoming.
Even a principled failure is better than passivity.
And fear of the past doesn’t get it: We could have pulled funding, but everybody in DC sings the old song about the fallout of the opposition to the Vietnam war. Are we enslaved to that forever?
When Darcy is elected, can we persuade her to have Puddy declared a toxic substance?
Progressives should always remember that Nov 2006, as great a victory as it was, meant only that our work was just getting started.
We will always need more and better progressive Dems – like Darcy Burner or someone with more backbone than Brian Baird.
If “there are more of us than there are of them,” why don’t we just go over and kick their asses?
@44-46: Thanks for the thoughtful responses. I wish there was more of this here and less hair pulling.
Believe me, these thoughts all roll through my mind. I recognize things aren’t getting better with us occupying the place. We trashed the place though and need to stick around and fix it. Absolutely this should include an all-out diplomatic effort (and I agree that it ain’t gonna happen with the current batch of assholes running things).
At some point, the factions are going to get tired. I’m hoping we can keep the violence tamped down a little until that point.
Finally, the worst possible outcome I can see is for the Dems to weaken each other and allow Rs to get back into the majority. There is more than just Iraq on the American plate and there are damned few solutions coming from the Republican side of the aisle that I have any more stomach for.
I can barely stand the idea of surviving the next 16 months.
-OM
Copied from another thread:
Half of us voted for her already. This recent poll shows that more will this time.
But you already have your answer; you have just rejected it. Try to get this: Dave Reichert is out of touch with what people in his district want, and Darcy better reflects their views. Have fun in 2008-2010. Try to get a better candidate.
New material:
If you want more, then she’s qualified because she supports a responsible close to our occupation of Iraq, supports reproductive rights and the civil rights of all citizens regardless of race, creed, gender and sexual preference, opposes warrantless wiretapping, torture and suspension of habeas corpus, supports quality public education for all our children and affordable health care to all Americans, consistently opposes drilling in ANWR, accepts the scientific consensus on evolution and climate change, and rejects estate tax repeal.
You must have missed all that.
50 OM
I just think you’re wrong.
“recognize things aren’t getting better with us occupying the place. We trashed the place though and need to stick around and fix it.”
We can’t. They don’t wnt us to. You and a lot of other people should realize that whatever our plans or our inentions, be they noble or base, we cannot achieve anything there without the support of a population that has made it very, very clear that they do not support us and do not want us there. And who is president and who is in Congress in the USA won’t change that.
“Absolutely this should include an all-out diplomatic effort (and I agree that it ain’t gonna happen with the current batch of assholes running things).”
Not sure what you mean here. Diplomacy might help to mediate the conflicting aims of Palestinians and Israelis, which would really help things in the ME, but we are not viewed as an honest broker in Iraq and can achieve no diplomatic traction. We can’t. Not possible.
At some point, the factions are going to get tired. I’m hoping we can keep the violence tamped down a little until that point.
“Finally, the worst possible outcome I can see is for the Dems to weaken each other and allow Rs to get back into the majority.”
Hard to imagine. Their backs are broken and they’re clinging to the same old, same old.
The problem with the thought process of sticking around to fix it is that the American Public is not willing to actually pay what it would take. It would require somewhere in the realms of 1 million soldiers to secure Iraq and protect infrastructure rebuilding as well as the structures already built. It would require a rather radical restructuring of our military, with a heavy emphasis on Military Police and Combat/Civil Engineers. And it would require atleast 1 trillion dollars to pay for the construction costs alone. The construction would need to be done by the Military’s Engineers as private contractors have been extremely unreliable and should not be used in combat zones.
The American electorate is not going to be willing to do that and none of the people involved in the decision process have leveled with them for that reason. Just as they talk about port security but ignore the thousands of miles of coastline that any boat can come up to and drop people off.
At this point, staying over there with the troop levels we have now, or could conceivably put over there with our current military, only inflames passions against us. We aren’t able to adequately protect the population and they know it. We can control certain sectors but the insurgents just move to a different sector we aren’t controlling and set up shop.
So the issue becomes, are we going to do it right or not. If not, and the fact that in not doing so we are causing more harm, we need to leave. We need to apologize for our arrogant mistake and we need to offer to pay for repairing the country’s infrastructure we destroyed. There would still be an audit where every expense is documented and it would have to be with complete transparency to the entire world. That is the most honorable and best way to leave Iraq.
BTW, I fully expect that the current government of Iraq will collapse when we leave. The offer of payment would be conditioned on beginning only after Iraq is stable and construction wouldn’t be targeted by insurgents.
I think the bottom line is: We broke it. Really, really badly.
And “it” extends beyond Iraq. Regardless of whom we want to hold responsible (and most of us are pretty agreed as to that) and what we should or shouldn’t have done in the past, we cannot put it back where it was. Nothing we can realistically hope to do will accomplish that.
Nothing.
It is what it is, and the best and quickest solution is to get the hell out, because it’ll get worse by the day, lipstick or not.
I did not feel that way this time last year, by any means, but:
It is what it is, again, and however infuriated we might be over it all, we need to suck it up and get the hell out, and LAST thing we need to worry about is the “cut and run” taunts by the discredited assholes that got us there.
Why don’t our resident wingnuts offer up a few of Dave Reichert’s quotes on Iraq and then defend their choice of candidate on the basis of, you know, his actual position? Why does that seem like a near-impossibility?
I mwean like his response to the effect of “I don’t really know anything about that.” Yep, that’s your guy.
@55
Mainly because Reichert has no clue what he’s talking about. Here he compares what we’re doing in Iraq to other wars, including our own Revolutionary War:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxrZTkwYa4c
I’m guessing Reichert was asleep that day in history class, because there’s no conceivable way to draw a parallel between the Revolutionary War and what’s happening in Iraq where the British are the Iraqis.
Hey, guess what?
Looking good for Darcy. Bad for greying former sheriffs lacking a spine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51zdk20Tyfg
57 Lee
Wow, comparing Americans fighting for their own land in their own country to the struggle of American troops acting like Imperial Stormtroopers occupying Iraq and being opposed by small guerilla bands of resisters fighting them. Amazing lack of perspective. Dave is so cool.
But Dave (apparently) has drunk the “existential threat” Kool-aid. Come on! Does anyone really think the very survival of that the most powerful military and economic nation on earth is threatened in some serious way by ragtag bands of Muslim freelancers? Ask them in England how seriously Irish bombers threatened their nation’s existence. And give me a freakin’ break, not that any threat to our country’s existence ever came out of Iraq!
Yes, Dave is a proud member of the “Believe that Iraq is the same as Osama’s Al Qaeda!” team. When in reality we invaded and beat down a cheap Third World country and now prevent them from recovering in order for Republicans to try to gain domestic political advantage. Dave’s pathetic, sad, murderous advantage.
Dave Reichert:
“We are the United States of America today and we are free because General Washington wouldn’t quit.”
Fred Kaplan describes an interview with a “Stephen Biddle, a military analyst at the Council on Foreign Relations” who is a key proponent of the “patchwork-quilt strategy” in Iraq (basically separating ethnic enclaves). What does Biddle think? Well:
Is that what Reichert means by “not quitting?” That we should spend undetermined trillions, undetermined American lives, and 20 years hoping to draw to an inside straight? And with what huge payoff? I mean, what do we gain that we wouldn’t by some other means? Without the incredible cost?
Here’s the video from General Paul Eaton discussing the need to address the issue of how to get US troops out of Iraq in a responsible manner and asking that people support Darcy Burner in her race against Dave Reichert.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvQU-O_uBDs
@60
It’s easy to gamble when it’s not your money on the line. And it’s easy to advocate war when it’s not your ass on the line.
How many of you chowderhead Burner Buddies actually live in the 8th District, huh???
Deb Eddy merely stated what Eastsiders, South King and North Pierce County residents think.
If Dim Darcy couldn’t get herself elected in a very blue state in a very blue year, then her 15-minutes of shame are history!
Deb Eddy’s roots are deep, and her instincts are right on. While she lives in the neighboring 1st District (as do I), many of her 48th Legislative District consituents are 8th Congressional District voters, and she knows what’s on their minds, and it ain’t votin’ for Burner the Bolshie.
What pisses you birds off about what Deb said was that it doesn’t fit with your blindered and blundering version/vision of what ought to be, not a realistic assessment of what actually is. In your dreams, Goldy and gang!
The Piper
@63
How many of you chowderhead Burner Buddies actually live in the 8th District, huh???
I’m actually moving there in October, and my in-laws already live there.
Deb Eddy merely stated what Eastsiders, South King and North Pierce County residents think.
Deb Eddy will be voting for Darcy too, just like many people in the 8th are ready to do as well.
If Dim Darcy couldn’t get herself elected in a very blue state in a very blue year, then her 15-minutes of shame are history!
The district is getting bluer, 2008 could very easily be an even bigger blue year, and Dave Reichert is still a dim bulb and not getting any brighter.
Deb Eddy’s roots are deep, and her instincts are right on.
Actually, her instincts are outdated. Opposition to the Iraq war is not “left”, it’s sane.
While she lives in the neighboring 1st District (as do I), many of her 48th Legislative District consituents are 8th Congressional District voters, and she knows what’s on their minds, and it ain’t votin’ for Burner the Bolshie.
I’m not sure what planet you’re reading this website from, but Burner’s as close to a “Bolshie” as Dave Reichert is to a scholar.
What pisses you birds off about what Deb said was that it doesn’t fit with your blindered and blundering version/vision of what ought to be, not a realistic assessment of what actually is. In your dreams, Goldy and gang!
They said the same thing in 2003 when we warned about what would happen if we invaded Iraq. They said the same thing in 2004 when we warned about how bad things would get if we re-elected Bush. They said the same thing in 2005 when they thought we couldn’t beat Joe Lieberman in a primary. And they said the same thing in 2006 when we saw potential for winning back the House and the Senate.
Yawn.
Exactly how do you continually put it out of your mind when you’re constantly wrong about things?
63 troll
I live in the 8th. You’re saying Deb Eddy doesn’t? But you’ll insult anyone else who doesn’t, but make excuses for her? Yeah, IOKIYAR, right? Get stuffed, assclown.
Oh, and this time I’m giving Darcy the limit! You hear that, Darcy?
It’s off topic, but I couldn’t resist:
News Item, Sept. 7, 2007:
“WASHINGTON – Laura Bush will undergo surgery on Saturday to relieve pressure on a pinched nerve in her neck, her press secretary said Friday.
The problem prevented the first lady from accompanying President Bush this week to Australia for the annual meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Sydney.
The president will be in Australia on Saturday, returning to Washington around dawn Sunday….”
My comment: remarkably, the pain in her neck quick subsided when Bush left for his trip without her, although doctors warned her that it was likely to return by Sunday.
IdiotSavant@38: Answer my questions in Post #3? You can even use the Clueless one YLB to help you formulate an inarticulate answer!
DaddyLove@51: Those are from the DNC web site. She isn’t articulating anything new from Moonbat! City Central. With all that new NutRoots $$$ where has she put out a statement saying Norman Hsu’s fund raising needs to stop?
Nary a peep Nary a peep
Puddystupid @ 69:
Darcy doesn’t take orders from your kind – right-wing fools.
Bang that Hsu drum all you want along with the rest of the sheep in right wing nut land. It won’t make anything any better for you.
Poor poor pathetic Puddy, maybe you should try using your brain for a change instead of playing with your pud. If you are too stupid to realize why a sane person would rather vote for Darcy than Dave than you are more beyond hope than the average right wing loon. Your questions are just the usual diversion from a radical right winger who knows their talking points no longer work on anyone with at least a double digit IQ.
@69
Those are from the DNC web site. She isn’t articulating anything new from Moonbat! City Central. With all that new NutRoots $$$ where has she put out a statement saying Norman Hsu’s fund raising needs to stop?
Um, was this comment supposed to be coherent?
Puddybud, can you do us a favor? Whenever you have 5 different threads of right-wing talking point stew floating around in that goopy pile of mush you call your brain, can you at least make an attempt to articulate them in a way that makes sense to those of us who all conveniently share English as a common language?
Can anyone, who knows Darcy, list the issues that she diverges with the democratic party on? I am interested because voting in this race will be a tough one for us moderates in the 8th.
Thanks.
Can anyone, who knows Darcy, list the issues that she diverges with the democratic party on? I am interested because voting in this race will be a tough one for us moderates in the 8th.
First of all, if you’re moderate, this election shouldn’t be a tough choice for you. It’s a choice between a moderate and an extremist.
Second, I believe Darcy has some disagreements with the Democratic Party on high tech visas and gun control, but you’d really have to check out her campaign site or ask her directly.
Third, and I’ve asked this repeatedly of people with no success, can you please tell me which positions taken by the Democratic Party are not moderate? I can’t think of a single one and every time I ask, people feel the need to change the subject on me.