Sirotablog
David Sirota is a political journalist and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist at Creators Syndicate. David writes about political corruption, globalization and working-class economic issues often ignored by both of America's political parties.
-
June 4, 2007 8:08 AM
VIDEO: Dems Promote the Innocent Bystander Fable At CNN Debate
I subjected myself to the torture that was the Democratic presidential primary debate last night, and came away thinking one thing: Many of the people on that stage really do not understand why the American public has often thought Democrats are weak. I say that because, as you can see from this YouTube video I put together, at least four of them regurgitated or validated what I have previously termed the Innocent Bystander Fable - the one where Democratic politicians pretend they are doing everything they can to stop the war, but are merely innocent bystanders with no real power to stop the Iraq War - when in fact most of the country knows they do have real power, but also knows that they are deliberately refusing to actually wield that power.
As you can see from the video above which I spliced together from last night's debate, at least some Democratic politicians do not seem to comprehend that the image of weakness has much less to do with positions on issues, and much more to do with whether a politician is perceived as being willing to use the power afforded to them in their public office. While I certainly agree that the responsibility for this war lies mostly with President Bush, the idea that Democrats (especially those who originally voted for the war and who have voted to keep funding the war without binding timelines) had nothing at all to do with the war is offensive for its dishonesty - and I'm glad at least a few Democrats on that stage like John Edwards, Chris Dodd and Dennis Kucinich had the guts to debunk the pass-the-buck rhetoric.
Continuing to push the Innocent Bystander Fable in the face of objective facts showing that it is a lie is not only precisely the way for Democrats to project weakness and insult the public's intelligence, but worst of all, the most aggressive way to indefinitely continue a war that the vast majority of the American people opposes.
-
TAKE ACTION
-
About David Sirota
David Sirota is a political journalist and nationally syndicated newspaper columnist at Creators Syndicate. He is the New York Times bestselling author of Hostile Takeover. He lives in Denver, Colorado. His daily blog can be found at CREDO Action. He contributes regularly to the Denver Post's Web site, is a senior editor at In These Times magazine and is working on his second book. He has been profiled in Newsweek and the Rocky Mountain News and is widely known for his reporting on political corruption, globalization and working-class economic issues often ignored by both of America's political parties. Sirota serves as co-chair of the Progressive States Network, a 501(c)3 organization that supports state legislators and that is a partner of CREDO.
You can subscribe to Sirota's e-mail newsletter by going to davidsirota.com and signing up in the lefthand corner. To find out more about Sirota, download his official biography or see his recent media appearances. You can e-mail him at sirota@credoaction.com.
The views expressed on this blog are his own, and do not necessarily represent the views of Working Assets (publisher of CREDO Action) or the institutions Sirota works for.
-
Recent Sirotablog entries
- "Center-Right Nation" Meme On Tape
- "Center-Right Nation" - Election Day Watch
- Promoting the Guy Whose Lies Boosted Ratings & Killed Thousands
- "Center-Right Nation" Watch - Mark Penn Edition
- Mandate Watch - Bellwether Races/Initiatives To Watch Below the Presidential Contest
- "Center-Right Nation" Watch - Doug Schoen Edition
- "Center-Right Nation" Watch
- Writing Lessons
- Court Says Colorado's Katherine Harris Is Violating Federal Law With Voter Purges
- NEWSFLASH: America Doesn't Like Its Jobs Shipped Overseas
-
More David Sirota
-
This Modern World
-
October 27, 2008 -
October 20, 2008 -
October 15, 2008 -
October 13, 2008 -
October 2, 2008
-
-
Donations Recipients
-
RSS feeds
Discussion
I'm so tired of the Democrat lies about this war. The leadership of the Democratic party in Congress voted for this war. If they had voted against it, things might be different. If they had stood up to Bush and refused to support this war of aggression, we would not be involved in Iraq.
But the most recent big lie by Democrats is that they cannot vote against the war (or the funding) because they do not have enough votes to override a veto. Guess what? Bush does not have the power to write checks. This is called a showdown. The Dems only authorize funding for withdrawal; Bush vetoes; no funds, no legislation: a standoff. Bush is the one who would blink or at least should blink.
I would like to see how much money was promised to the Democrats by the military corporations if they voted for continued war or, like Hillary and Obama, waited until the bill was passed to make their strategic "stand" against the war.
And I'm so tired of this constant whining about "We support the troops." And the Democratic (i.e. Hillary) suggestion that the only thing wrong with this war is that we did not give the military more weapons, and did not send in sufficient power to destroy the entire country. The war was wrong because it was an unprovoked assault on a third world country for the purpose of stealing the resources of that country. Body army for the U.S. military would have changed nothing with respect to the central and primary problem that this is a war of aggression.
As noted by others, right after the Dems voted to continue giving Bush money for this war, they sent out an e-mail proclaiming proudly that they had succeeded in raising minimum wage. Most people do not work for minimum wage. Note that the Democrats refuse to address the major economic issues that affect working men and women in this country. Such as what is the plan to create jobs for the millions who have lost their manufacturing jobs. What is the Democrat plan to raise the income of the working people and cut the obscene compensation to CEOs, and corporate profits? When will the Dems raise taxes on the rich folks? Silence. The Democrats' big economic policy seems to be to raise minimum wage for the kids and the lowest segment of society, and ignore the effects of Bush's policies that are financially devastating 80% of the working people in this country.
Finally, it appears that Bush intends to exhaust the military by using up the equipment and personnel so that he can privative the military. In other words, get so many troops tied down in Iraq, create some phony crisis in another place, demand billions more for "private" [Blackwater] forces to be sent in somewhere for some purpose. Remember that it all comes down to money.
Torture is a good word to describe watching last nights Democratic debates, it shouldn't have been though.
That said, you are right, the Democrats are reinforcing public perception they are weak. Especially Obama and Hillary whose finger in the wind votes on the Iraq funding bill showed it for all the world to see. These are not people of principle and believe in fighting for whats right, only for whats politically expedient. Whats so sad is that both come from safe seats where they would face no blowback over filibuster or speaking out. Having either as president would be a disaster for the Democrats for a number of reasons(like their ties to K Street and the Rubinites).
Though its doubtful Hillary would win, she's the ideal candidate for the GOP to gut like a fish.
Edwards did good but he's not knocking out either Obama or Hillary out their respective positions.
Gravel IMO represents something of a anomally in politics - he speaks his mind and isn't afraid. He was also provided the only energetic presence there IMO. He nailed Obama ass to the wall on the Walter Reed Scandal. Watching Obama make excuses for his fuckup was disgusting, the man has no shame. Gravel further infuriated the politically correct multiculturalist thugs with his "english as offical language" statement. The Kossacks are spitting blood over that one.
BTW railing against "english as the official langauge" like Obama did, may win brownie points with the hard left, it doesn't win anyone else over.
The DLC types (Clinton and Obama) strike me as actually Republicans wearing Democratic clothes. I'm like Harry Truman; I have no use for Democrats who act like Republicans!
David,
Thanks for the video summary. You're right on target, as usual. The debate was disgusting on so many levels. The only candidate uttering a peap about trade was Dennis Kucinich. He advocated canceling NAFTA & CAFTA, on 2 separate occasions, which I completely agree with.
The debate seemed like a contest of Democratic plutocrats, as to which one could appeal to their rich campaign contributors the most. The only true populist message came from Kucinich, with some addition by Gravel.
It's not all about who espouses the best giveaway programs, that ostensibly are for the poor (but in reality benefit the Dems' rich campaign contributors even more).
Health care might be an important issue, but without jobs, no one is going to worry about health care, much less be able to afford it. (Having health insurance, but being unemployed and sleeping in the street, is not a good trade-off.) Employment and wages were of no concern to any candidate, other than Dennis Kucinich.
Did any of them mention the continuing increase in income inequality? Did any of them mention declining real wages? Did any of them mention continual loss of manufacturing jobs? Do they even care???
All they did was piss and moan about how "it's not our fault that we're in Iraq", and how "it's not our fault that the war is continuing to escalate." And again, implied by it's absence in the debate, the job and wage issue are of NO concern to the Democratic candidates (except for Kucinich). All they care about is appealing to the rich elite, and how to spin their plutocratic advocacy as being favorable to working Americans. Did they convince any working Americans that they've got our back??? I don't think so.
They didn't convince me. I doubt they convinced anyone else either.
And I guess it's "not their fault" either, that real wages are declining, job growth is practically 0, and that both the manufacturing and housing sectors are in recession. If it's "not their fault," and there's not anything they can do about it, then why should we vote for them???
We need to elect a President who'll say "Yes, it is my fault, and as a result of it being my fault, I'm going to fix it."
I didn't see anyone willing to say that (except Kucinich). Did you?
Economic Populist Forum
Excellent rebuttal of the "Innocent bystanders fraud",especially since I didn't watch. Personally, I've lost interest in both parties candidates all ready. Dean-Webb 2008
I had hopes during the election that the Dems would have the guts to stand up to Bush -- that's why we voted them in, wasn't it? Can't they get a clue?
I guess not. I've mailed Pelosi and Boxer to take me off their mailing lists. I've had it with the current batch of buy-my-vote Dems.
You're right David. We need Progressives in Congress, not just Dem-publicans who can't see past their war-chests.
Thanks to the Dem's spinlessness, we need yet another round of throwing the bastards out.
Here are two real progressives we should support. Please check out their sites:
Peter Mathews, running for US Rep from CA:
http://mathewsforcongress.org/
Jamie Eldridge, running for US Rep from MA:
http://www.jamieforcongress.com/
The State Houses are full of Progressive talent that will carry our priorities to Congress. Once they see the support is there, they'll run.
Health care might be an important issue, but without jobs, no one is going to worry about health care, much less be able to afford it
you nailed it, thats why the issue is a dodge for the real one - loss of jobs and decreasing real wage earnings. Something only Kucinich had the nerve to talk about and the others avoided like the plague. Why? because most of them are married at the hip with K Street and Hedge Funds - both hostile to the working class interests.
Edwards may talk alot about the two Americas but why is he silent on the corporate written "free trade" bill in the House or that corporate written immigration bill? To speak out and condemn both and the way they were brought out would demonstrate to the working class he's ready to lead. If he doesn't... well he'll just be viewed as another Democratic has-been.
David, you continually astound me by the way you reveal facts that others so conveniently ignore. Up until now I haven't heard once about the link between corporations receiving government contracts and the Iraq spending bill.
All this talk about "funding the troops" is nonsense. The troops will continue with inadequate numbers, inadequate protection, excessive time on duty, all for dirt poor wages while contractors continue to make obscene, blood-stained profits.
PACs must have been doing double-time on the democrats between the vetoed bill and the three-month extension. Proof that American capitalism has become nothing more than a modern form of cannibalism.
good comment, NABNYC!
The old remedy is still the best to begin to democratize the Congress which is, with brave exceptions, the tool of the "Corpocracy" (my term for the form of government we live under: rule by Big Corporations): PUBLIC FINANCING OF CAMPAIGNS. The spine the Democrats need first is the spine to vote for this. Many bills proposing it have been defeated by huge majorities over the last thirty years.
Join the Discussion