• About
  • Archive
  • Privacy & Policy
  • Contact
Dana Blankenhorn
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com
No Result
View All Result
Dana Blankenhorn
No Result
View All Result
Home A-Clue

Jane Hamsher is a Big Fat Idiot

by Dana Blankenhorn
January 8, 2010
in A-Clue, Current Affairs, futurism, Health, history, Internet, political philosophy, politics, The 1970 Game, The Age of Obama
14
0
SHARES
1
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Think of this as Volume 14, Number 2 of A-Clue.com, the online newsletter I've written since 1997. Enjoy.


Jane_Hamsher 2009 Let me make one thing clear at the outset.

This is not a right wing hit piece. I am not arguing with Jane Hamsher's politics. I'm a fan.

So why the headline?

Because since the President's inauguration, Firedoglake and progressive blogs in general have been acting foolishly. They have not been doing the job a rising political movement vanguard is supposed to do. 

That is the same job they had before the election. Growing the movement. Targeting political enemies. Recruiting replacement candidates. Pushing an Administration they support in a supportive direction.

Instead they've been carping, treating the President like they do Republicans. They have been assuming ill will on the part of his appointees. They have not taken their real political enemies seriously enough.  They have behaved like something they are not, political insiders. They have acted shocked (shocked) that sausage is produced in the Sausage Factory. They have let the perfect become the enemy of the good.

Markos moulitsas_ 2007 Take health care, for instance. They have acted surprised that there are conservative Democrats who mean them harm, that there are Washington interest groups who don't share their views, that some of the people they supported because they were "better" than the Republican alternatives were not that much better.

As a result they have spent a full year mired in minutiae, they have given all the political initiative to the Worst Persons in the World, and they wound up opposing a bill that, while not very good at all, is still infinitely better than what we have now. 

The present bill is better because is changes market incentives. It features community rating, so that insurers' profits will be best served by keeping their insureds healthy, not by finding excuses to kick them off coverage. Who pays is less important than how much we pay, and the bottom line on who pays was always going to be that the people pay.

Liberalism's enemies, Democratic, Republican, and media alike, have treated the Netroots like chumps, like people who just fell off the turnip truck, and Jane Hamsher has fallen for it — hook, line and sinker. So, should I add, have John Arevsois of Americablog, Markos Moulitsas of The Daily Kos, and every other liberal blogger who has acted like a jilted lover in the face of the President doing preciesely what he promised to do.

There is still time for Jane and her cohorts to save themselves from being the Carterites of our time. But it's going to take a recommitment to first principles:

  1. You are not in power. Stop acting like you ever were. Get out of the sausage factory. 
  2. You want Better Democrats. Find them, follow them, funnel money, time, and media attention toward them. 
  3. Get off the President's back. You prefer Bush? President Palin? What you have is infinitely better than what you could have. 
  4. Organize, organize, organize. Build networks with progressive sites in states and cities around the country. List them, link to them, read them, use them as local affiliates. 
  5. Think local. Stop looking to Washington for answers. Find activists, officials, and stories outside the Beltway. Bring them to Washington's attention. 
  6. Remember who the enemy is. It's the Haties, the Cheneyites, the Economic Royalists. Mostly it's the assumptions built up over the last 40 years, the entire Nixon-Reagan-Bush Era. Why anyone thought they could be overthrown completely after one election is beyond me.

Lyndon johnson with beagles The assumption that "it's always good news for Republicans" is general because, until recently, Republicans were almost-always ascendant. The last two times Democrats had both Congress and the White House — 1993-94 and 197-78 — it ended badly. (Add 1967-68 to that and you can see that Democratic institutional success is beyond the living memory of nearly everyone in Washington City.)

Most of what Hamsher and the other Netroot bloggers have been engaged in this last year is friendly fire. Republicans have a lesson to teach here, and that lesson is unity matters more than anything. You fight in your primary, but you stay on side after that. On everything. 

The difference between this Crisis period and the last is Hatie Unity, which is absolute. (Democrats were split over the war in 1969, and on race, making them easy for Nixon to beat when he needed to.)

It will take at least two more election cycles — successful ones — before validation causes today's Washington assumptions to break down. Meanwhile you have to do as they do, and that's hang together. Because otherwise you will surely hang separately.

What makes this most ironic is that the situation isn't really that bad. Republican leaders, and the Republican Party generally, remain very unpopular, much less popular than Democratic leaders and the Democratic Party. The danger is the "enthusiasm gap" — the greater likelihood that Haties will show up at the next polls than Democrats.

Jane, Markos and the rest have helped create that Enthusiasm Gap. They may enjoy blaming the Obama people (especially Rahm Emanuel) for that, but in the end you're responsible for your own political actions, no one else. 

Rebuilding enthusiasm will be difficult, but it can be done. Follow the rules outlined above. Start local. Network. Challenge the real enemy, and even where primaries are necessary, unite afterward. 

You are campaigners, not bureaucrats. Campaign. 

Tags: AmericablogDemocratshealth carehealth reformHoward DeanJane HamsherMarkos MoulitsasNetrootsPresident Obama
Previous Post

Medievalism

Next Post

A Long Walk

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn began his career as a financial journalist in 1978, began covering technology in 1982, and the Internet in 1985. He started one of the first Internet daily newsletters, the Interactive Age Daily, in 1994. He recently retired from InvestorPlace and lives in Atlanta, GA, preparing for his next great adventure. He's a graduate of Rice University (1977) and Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism (MSJ 1978). He's a native of Massapequa, NY.

Next Post
A Long Walk

A Long Walk

Comments 14

  1. Dana Blankenhorn says:
    15 years ago

    You can't turn history on a dime. You don't get a pony. From anyone.
    This President has been remarkably effective, given the institutional headwind. Washington thinks everything is good for Republicans because for 40 years it generally has been. You don't turn that around overnight.
    Obama is turning it around. Slowly — too slowly for you to be certain

    Reply
  2. Dana Blankenhorn says:
    15 years ago

    You can't turn history on a dime. You don't get a pony. From anyone.
    This President has been remarkably effective, given the institutional headwind. Washington thinks everything is good for Republicans because for 40 years it generally has been. You don't turn that around overnight.
    Obama is turning it around. Slowly — too slowly for you to be certain

    Reply
  3. JohnK says:
    15 years ago

    Dana,
    Don’t get excited. MA will go republican. Senate will derail or water down Obama’s socialist dreams, and Zridling will be proven right. Just screencapture his reply, and read it again, exactly one year from now.
    Socialism fails always and anytime.

    Reply
  4. JohnK says:
    15 years ago

    Dana,
    Don’t get excited. MA will go republican. Senate will derail or water down Obama’s socialist dreams, and Zridling will be proven right. Just screencapture his reply, and read it again, exactly one year from now.
    Socialism fails always and anytime.

    Reply
  5. Dana Blankenhorn says:
    15 years ago

    I agree that, regardless of the outcome, today's election in Massachusetts represents a turning point.
    But it may not be the one you're looking for.
    The President's program is not, and was not, "socialism." In any event, Europe's growth rate is better than ours, and their currency is stronger. Their people get more health care for less money than we do — not just as individuals but as a society. Their life expectancies keep rising while ours have flatlined.
    What I expect to happen after this is that Democrats are going to become more unyielding, not less. Turning the other cheek has just gotten the President kicked in the balls. And we're sick of it.
    This may not result in legislation, but it will result in less tolerance of nonsense like what you sent to this blog, not just from this blogger but from Democrats and the Administration.
    What you call "freedom" I call fascism.
    Dana

    Reply
  6. Dana Blankenhorn says:
    15 years ago

    I agree that, regardless of the outcome, today's election in Massachusetts represents a turning point.
    But it may not be the one you're looking for.
    The President's program is not, and was not, "socialism." In any event, Europe's growth rate is better than ours, and their currency is stronger. Their people get more health care for less money than we do — not just as individuals but as a society. Their life expectancies keep rising while ours have flatlined.
    What I expect to happen after this is that Democrats are going to become more unyielding, not less. Turning the other cheek has just gotten the President kicked in the balls. And we're sick of it.
    This may not result in legislation, but it will result in less tolerance of nonsense like what you sent to this blog, not just from this blogger but from Democrats and the Administration.
    What you call "freedom" I call fascism.
    Dana

    Reply
  7. Zaine_ridling says:
    15 years ago

    You’re right, Dana, no economy is turned around quickly, especially after the unprecedented devastation of the Bush years. Imagine if Obama had been handed Clinton’s surpluses — Obama would not have squandered them away.
    What’s troubling for me is the self-inflicted wounds. Rather than strong health insurance reform, he swung for the fences. But with “friends” like Joe Lieberman and the Blue Dogs, it was a miscalculation to spend an entire year on health reform when he had already eliminated drug reimportation and so willingly dropped the public option. It appears he listened to the wrong people; that is, his campaign staff and Rahm Emmanuel rather than his gut.
    And the worst self-inflicted wound is the inability to walk away from Iraq and Afghanistan. Continuing to throw billions down those purposeless sink holes doesn’t get us to energy independence, doesn’t win friends to help us with the fight against terrorism, and every dollar spent there is one less dollar spent here on infrastructure, education, much-needed digital infrastructure, and on green tech.
    We know that the Republicans will stand and vote NO on everything. The Democrats may be incompetent and inept, but conservatives are certifiably insane. It’s time we consider changing the structure of our government to deal with 21st century realities and challenges. Start with the Senate rules; they’re not constitutionally protected. When you have 59 senators — which is very rare! — and you still can’t get anything passed, it makes governing impossible. There will always be one Lieberman, Snow, Nelson, Lincoln, Landrieu, et al. to fill that one musical chair to block anything you want to accomplish.

    Reply
  8. Zaine_ridling says:
    15 years ago

    You’re right, Dana, no economy is turned around quickly, especially after the unprecedented devastation of the Bush years. Imagine if Obama had been handed Clinton’s surpluses — Obama would not have squandered them away.
    What’s troubling for me is the self-inflicted wounds. Rather than strong health insurance reform, he swung for the fences. But with “friends” like Joe Lieberman and the Blue Dogs, it was a miscalculation to spend an entire year on health reform when he had already eliminated drug reimportation and so willingly dropped the public option. It appears he listened to the wrong people; that is, his campaign staff and Rahm Emmanuel rather than his gut.
    And the worst self-inflicted wound is the inability to walk away from Iraq and Afghanistan. Continuing to throw billions down those purposeless sink holes doesn’t get us to energy independence, doesn’t win friends to help us with the fight against terrorism, and every dollar spent there is one less dollar spent here on infrastructure, education, much-needed digital infrastructure, and on green tech.
    We know that the Republicans will stand and vote NO on everything. The Democrats may be incompetent and inept, but conservatives are certifiably insane. It’s time we consider changing the structure of our government to deal with 21st century realities and challenges. Start with the Senate rules; they’re not constitutionally protected. When you have 59 senators — which is very rare! — and you still can’t get anything passed, it makes governing impossible. There will always be one Lieberman, Snow, Nelson, Lincoln, Landrieu, et al. to fill that one musical chair to block anything you want to accomplish.

    Reply
  9. Jamies0n says:
    15 years ago

    “It’s time we consider changing the structure of our government to deal with 21st century realities and challenges. Start with the Senate rules; they’re not constitutionally protected. When you have 59 senators — which is very rare! — and you still can’t get anything passed, it makes governing impossible.”
    Yep. The typical language of desired change. Hitler and Mussoline did exactly the same thing when the democratic processes didn’t go their way.
    In reality you’re just frustrated that the democrats can’t get their way.
    The founding fathers did a good thing with the design of the system. No need to tamper with it.

    Reply
  10. Jamies0n says:
    15 years ago

    “It’s time we consider changing the structure of our government to deal with 21st century realities and challenges. Start with the Senate rules; they’re not constitutionally protected. When you have 59 senators — which is very rare! — and you still can’t get anything passed, it makes governing impossible.”
    Yep. The typical language of desired change. Hitler and Mussoline did exactly the same thing when the democratic processes didn’t go their way.
    In reality you’re just frustrated that the democrats can’t get their way.
    The founding fathers did a good thing with the design of the system. No need to tamper with it.

    Reply
  11. Dana Blankenhorn says:
    15 years ago

    Absolutely agreed. The blame lies with the President. Let this be his wake-up call. I'll have more on this later, in a post tentatively titled "Finding Your Inner W"
    Dana

    Reply
  12. Dana Blankenhorn says:
    15 years ago

    Absolutely agreed. The blame lies with the President. Let this be his wake-up call. I'll have more on this later, in a post tentatively titled "Finding Your Inner W"
    Dana

    Reply
  13. Dana Blankenhorn says:
    15 years ago

    JamiesOn: The Founders created a system where you needed a two-thirds majority of both Houses for the President to engage in war. That went by the boards in 1964, when the "Tonkin Gulf Resolution" created 11 years of war (on a 98-2 vote) when only 50 were necessary. (The Vice President breaks ties.)
    Same thing with the filibuster. It's a Senate Rule. It's not in the Constitution, except insofar as the Courts let the Senate make their own rules. Rules are voted on at the start of each Congress. It's the first thing both Houses do. So you can, if you like, eliminate this 60 vote threshold with a 51 vote majority at the start of a session.
    Don't go all "Founders" on me, please. It's degrading. To you. You're better than that. The Constitution as written contained procedures for amendment, and it has been amended many times since the Founders died.
    If there were something you really wanted and the Constitution were in the way, you'd be all for amending it. So don't tell me what "the Founders said" and then, as many Republicans do, quote the Anti-Federalist papers to prove your case.
    Dana

    Reply
  14. Dana Blankenhorn says:
    15 years ago

    JamiesOn: The Founders created a system where you needed a two-thirds majority of both Houses for the President to engage in war. That went by the boards in 1964, when the "Tonkin Gulf Resolution" created 11 years of war (on a 98-2 vote) when only 50 were necessary. (The Vice President breaks ties.)
    Same thing with the filibuster. It's a Senate Rule. It's not in the Constitution, except insofar as the Courts let the Senate make their own rules. Rules are voted on at the start of each Congress. It's the first thing both Houses do. So you can, if you like, eliminate this 60 vote threshold with a 51 vote majority at the start of a session.
    Don't go all "Founders" on me, please. It's degrading. To you. You're better than that. The Constitution as written contained procedures for amendment, and it has been amended many times since the Founders died.
    If there were something you really wanted and the Constitution were in the way, you'd be all for amending it. So don't tell me what "the Founders said" and then, as many Republicans do, quote the Anti-Federalist papers to prove your case.
    Dana

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Post

The Coming Labor War

The Insanity of Wealth

May 7, 2025
Tachtig Jaar Van Vrede en Vrijheid

Tachtig Jaar Van Vrede en Vrijheid

May 5, 2025
Make America Dutch Again

Make America Dutch Again

April 30, 2025
Bikes and Trains

Opa Fiets is Depressed

April 29, 2025
Subscribe to our mailing list to receives daily updates direct to your inbox!


Archives

Categories

Recent Comments

  • Dana Blankenhorn on The Death of Video
  • danablank on The Problem of the Moment (Is Not the Problem of the Moment)
  • cipit88 on The Problem of the Moment (Is Not the Problem of the Moment)
  • danablank on What I Learned on my European Vacation
  • danablank on Boomer Roomers

I'm Dana Blankenhorn. I have covered the Internet as a reporter since 1983. I've been a professional business reporter since 1978, and a writer all my life.

  • Italian Trulli

Browse by Category

Newsletter


Powered by FeedBlitz
  • About
  • Archive
  • Privacy & Policy
  • Contact

© 2023 Dana Blankenhorn - All Rights Reserved

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Dana
  • Posts
  • Contact Dana
  • Archive
  • A-clue.com

© 2023 Dana Blankenhorn - All Rights Reserved