Your generous
donations help keep
this site running.
Visa/MC/PayPal accepted.
I have to say that Democrats are acting awfully un-Democrat-like in their political handling of the SCHIP debate. I say this, because they're winning. Big time.
But this week, other than condemning Rush Limbaugh, the most important thing for Democrats to talk about is health care, so all the talking points this week will be on the subject of the SCHIP legislation, which will soon be on President Bush's desk, and which he has promised to veto.
Luckily, I don't have to compose an article on why this is a silly idea. Frank Zappa already did it for me, so I will rely on his testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation from 9/19/85 -- almost exactly 22 years ago.
A little background is necessary for those who don't know the history of this testimony. This hearing was pushed by a group calling themselves the "Parents' Music Resource Council," (PMRC) which was comprised of four wives of Washington politicians. One of the most prominent was Senator Al Gore's wife Tipper. Al Gore himself sat on this committee and questioned Zappa. This is why she occasionally (even today) gets booed at any event which has music-lovers in the audience.
She has earned those boos, in my opinion. The PMRC was trying to get legislation passed to put warning stickers on albums (yes, actual "albums" -- this was pre-CD) so parents could see what their children were buying. They really didn't want legislation as much as they wanted the music industry to institute its own ratings system, much like the MPAA does for movies (the people who decide whether a movie is "R" or "PG"). They were basically Senators' wives with too much time on their hands (they also were upset over Satanic lyrics supposedly recorded backwards on Led Zeppelin albums).
We need a Senate Majority Leader who will believe in something, say so in a telegenic and charismatic fashion on television, and then back it up by fighting for it in the Senate. It's all about that intangible quality called leadership. A strong leader might lead us off a cliff, or into the wasteland of permanent minority status -- but they could also lead us back to being a party people can believe would stand up and fight for what is right.
The question remains: Is Harry Reid the right person to do so, right now? Or is it time for Harry to go?
Why are Democrats so lame on basic PR?
Someone asked me that question on my blog the other day, and I didn't really have an answer. Why are Democrats so incredibly weak on framing their message correctly? Many books have been written exploring this subject and offering sound advice on how to make it better across the board, and yet it still continues.
It seems to be Constitution Week for this column.
Today I'd like to examine two constitutional questions -- whether Congress can give immunity to a crime already committed, and whether Congress can force states into a primary schedule of their own devising.
This upcoming week is going to be perhaps the most important week of the 110th Congress. General Petraeus will give his report, Ambassador Crocker will likewise report; and the debate on what to do next in Iraq will begin in earnest.
So why are Democrats seemingly admitting defeat -- before the argument has even begun? Why are you essentially taking what should be a position of strength, and (by buying into the White House's spin) turning it into a position of weakness? Do you really think this is the best way to end the Iraq war, or (for that matter) the best way to convince voters to vote for Democrats in 2008?
. . . Starting with the good news, the ACLU has won a legal victory (again) with a ruling by a judge who has actually read the First and Fourth Amendments to the Constitution. The ruling bans the federal government from issuing "National Security Letters" (NSLs) which are, in essence, a power usually reserved for royalty (I've actually written about this many times in the past). The FBI issued NSLs to avoid the pesky process of actually getting a warrant before searching or seizing evidence. The judge threw this mockery of the Constitution on the ashheap of history. Of course, the Bush Administration will probably appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court, so stay tuned.
Republicans, thankfully, are doing a good job of self-destructing on their own. This will serve to depress their base in the primaries and the election next year. But Democrats should be warned that their own base will likely desert them if they can't manage to win a few fights in Congress.
Democrats have proven that they can intelligently frame an issue about a place nobody visits, since they have consistently shut down Republican efforts to drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). When people hear ANWR, they think of caribou. There's a reason they do, and that reason is because Democrats successfully framed the issue (for once). Protecting streams for fishing is another image they could be just as successfully utilizing to show the American public the face of the Republican Party, up close and personal.