Far better to analyze polticians rhetoric, since left fundamentalists think words at rallies are all that are important.
-- Nathan Newman
----- Original Message -----
From: R
To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 1:05 AM
Subject: Re: Daschle eats his words, and then some
----- Original Message -----
From: Nathan Newman
To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: Daschle eats his words, and then some
Largely because I disagree with your assessment of Daschle.
i didn't realize it was that simple.
He's a piss-poor public speaker but for two years,
and i always thought public speaking was his strong suit.
he's kept the Dems pretty solid in blocking a range of Bush legislation and judges. With a not terrific hand, he's actually blocked quite a bit of the damage Bush has tried to do, from Sutton and Estrada to ANWR to the December Bush tax cut to the bankruptcy bill.
my goodness; his accomplishments pale beside his failures.
I think that's all pretty praisworthy in my book
to quote groucho marx: "from the time i picked up your book to the time i put it down, i was convulsed with laughter. someday i intend reading it."
As for the column, check out the Progressive Populist-- it runs twice a month at www.populist.com :)
thanks for the warning.
----- Original Message -----
From: R
To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: Daschle eats his words, and then some
nathan, it's interesting how you continually put an intellectual face -- and rationale if one could call it that -- on incompetence, weakness, corruption, failure and stupidity. you find "reason" where there is none. strategy among the hopeless and confused. and sense among the senseless. you should be writing columns for a newspaper somewhere; an embedded journalist for the fools paradise set.
R
----- Original Message -----
From: Nathan Newman
To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: Daschle eats his words, and then some
----- Original Message -----
From: "RE" <earnest at tallynet.com>
>But Daschle does seem to think that unless he apologizes he will be in
>trouble, so he believes someone is paying attention. It's just not
clear
>to me if he is being overwhelmed by public opinion's vagaries, or allowing
>himself to be overwhelmed in a masochistic, stupefying gesture. In that
>respect I wish he'd just keep his mouth shut in the first place, rather
than
>say "Look at me, I'm powerful, and even I have to crumble and apologize."
Actually I think it was more strategic than that, laying the political
marker that Bush had screwed up the diplomacy then signing off for the
duration. And he never apologized for the analysis, only for the timing--
which in many ways is a great way to appear to apologize while not
withdrawing the substance of the criticism. When things go bad, despite
official Dem support for the troops, the GOP won't be able to then say that
it was really a bipartisan position.
Daschle and the Dems are trying to have their cake (criticize Bush) and eat
it too (appear supportive of the troops). There may be better strategic ways
to do it, but I think people are overemphasizing the apology and not enought
the substance of the criticism.
-- Nathan
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20030331/4630e80d/attachment.htm>