Saturday, October 28, 2006

Dinner with the General

I Had fun at the Jefferson Jackson Dinner last night.

Pivotal, of course, was a nano-brief conversation with General Wesley Clark (who told me to stuff my blog for the next 10 days or so, and walk precincts).

Later, from the podium, the General rallied local election foot soldiers and paymasters in an impassioned appeal for these last few days and hours of the campaign.

General Clark's keynote was that Democrats have to become a "full-service" party in the tradition of Harry S. Truman. He said that means tough and salient on national security and that there's no better time then at present when there's a vacuum in that department in our current misgovernment.

Ellen Nagler (Broadview) welcomed the event. RJ Eskow (Night Light and The Huffington Post) sang songs such as "Faded Coat of Blue". And Brad Friedman (The Brad Blog) convinced us that voting machines will inevitably bring us into another "constitutional crisis" this November. That is why Democratic candidates not only have to win this year, they have to win BIG.

12 Moderated Comments:

Blogger LittleBill said...

What do you think will happen if we lose the election this time? Do you think any of us will believe that is really true? And if that happens and enough people believe it was rigged again, what should our reaction be, passive or active?

10/28/2006 09:22:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a Brit, so have no influence or say in the mid terms, but if the Republicans hold both Houses in the face of this disastrous war, the Military Commissions Act and legalised torture. The moral high ground will be lost for a generation, and the free west and democracy will become a thing of the past. We are watching these elections in England as never before. The Labour administration will face its test in May 07, they will lose heavily. If there is any further poll rigging the reaction can only be active. Good Luck

10/28/2006 10:37:00 AM  
Blogger LittleBill said...

I'm so glad you're watching over there, Guthrum. Glad you see it the way so many of us do over here. We all wish you well over there in May too.

10/28/2006 10:53:00 AM  
Blogger J.C. said...

Clark could play an interesting roll in the future.
I don`t trust his intentions in the present. I am not convinced he is a good guy.
All politicians are scum now in a sense and he is a politician.
It won`t make any difference if what you call progressives win the election.
The Corporatacracy runs both sides, and the reality is that Democracy is a dead letter here and has been since the late 1940`s.

10/28/2006 12:56:00 PM  
Blogger E said...

Go Vigilante, meeting Clark! Awesome! He is the only candidate to whom I sent money in the last cycle. I think, if we can circumvent the Hillary thing, that he could be a viable player. It's time for Dems to stop worrying about likeability and liberal purity and start worrying about ELECTABILITY. For my money, the General's got it (or will have it).
I'm jealous as all hell that you met him. ;)

10/28/2006 01:22:00 PM  
Blogger J.C. said...

Clark seems like an ordinary political puppet to me.

As a creative thinker he is a 3 on a scale of 10.

He wrote a book on economics which is really rather pathetic.

You act like he is a rock star.

10/28/2006 01:27:00 PM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

10/28/2006 01:40:00 PM  
Blogger Bob Keller said...

Vigilante, If you don't mind, would you please identify a few of the "progressive" candidates?

Among those running for the House and Senate this year, who fits your broad definition of "progressive?"

What should a candidate "stand for" in order to be a progressive? Are there issues beyond being against the UULUIUOI and perhaps favoring the impeachment of Bush?

I'm not trying to put you on the spot. I'm looking for a deeper understanding.

the Wizard.....

10/29/2006 05:19:00 AM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Thanks, Wizard, for the correction. I meant "Democratic" candidates, not "Progressive" candidates. I have updated my piece, giving you credit here.

10/29/2006 11:24:00 AM  
Blogger Kentucky Rain said...

If the Democrats do take the house, or both house and senate, I hope they don't waste their time trying to impeach Bush. There are more important things to do, like fixing what 12 years of Republican power has broken. Bush will be a lame duck and will go down in history as the worst president ever. Sadly, the blame will be placed on the American people who elected this fool to begin with.

Very interesting post Guthrum. I was born in Coventry and still have family all over GB.

Great you got to see Clark Vigil!

I don't want to think about us losing again LittleBill. I just don't want to think about it. When Kerry lost I went into seclusion with a couple of cases of fine ale for about three days.

10/29/2006 04:28:00 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Agree with Guthrum entirely. Many Europeans think the same.

The election is a moral test.

10/30/2006 04:46:00 AM  
Blogger J.C. said...

The election is a moral test.? Ha ha that's funny.

Our political system is not based on any kind of morality . It is based on money , special influence, lies, etc.

At the very least Bush should be impeached. If that is all that happens to him , he is fortunate.
Remember the plots to remove Hitler.?

10/30/2006 06:20:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home