Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Dems Promote the Innocent Bystander Fable At CNN Debate

Posted by David Sirota at 10:02 AM on June 4, 2007.


David Sirota: Projecting weakness has a lot less to do with issues than it does with refusing to wield the power the public has given you.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Video in your
mailbox!

 

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 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.

Digg!

Tagged as: iraq, debate, primary, democratic, obama, clinton, biden, richardson, edwards, dodd, kucinich

David Sirota is a veteran political strategist and author of Hostile Takeover, a New York Times bestseller about the corruption of both political parties.


Veterans Against McCain
New VoteVet.org ad gives voice to veterans for redeployment.
Post by Vote Vets. July 24, 2008.
Rapper Nas Leads the Fight to End FOX's Racism
Nas joined progressive groups to deliver a 600,000-signature petition to FOX headquarters.
Post by ZP Heller. July 24, 2008.
Republicans Admit Off-Camera Siegelman Case Was Fixed
Rove's non-denial denials fall under Bush League Justice.
Post by Brave New Films. July 24, 2008.

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
You nailed it!
Posted by: hagwind on Jun 4, 2007 8:58 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So if Bush vetoes one bill, pass another and another and another. Make it crystal clear that Bush is responsible. And while you're at it, speak out. Take some risks. You presidential hopefuls keep telling us what great leaders you'll be when you get elected; how about giving us a sneak preview by displaying your leadership skills now??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Are we all bystanders now?
Posted by: oregoncharles on Jun 4, 2007 11:28 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I feel sorry for David Sirota. He's doing wonderful work, exposing the fundamental corruption of the Democratic Party and their refusal to do what they were elected for. Trouble is, he also works for Democrats as a campaign consultant, as he has himself described. As a result, he's stuck in a party he has shown to be dishonest and implicitly in league with the Republicans. And he has certain limits on his journalism: things like listing all the Dems that voted wrong, or explaining to us just how the party controls the nomination process, keeping real progressives like Kucinich effectively out of the race. Remember what happened to Howard Dean? Dean was even a centrist - but he was against the war, so he had to be stopped.

But Sirota's not alone. His name is legion. At the moment, for instance, it includes most of the peace movement. Cindy Sheehan finally resigned from the Democratic Party out of disgust and discouragement, and I know others who have, but it seems that most progressives still consider themselves Democrats.

Consider: both of the recent betrayals in Congress, on the war funding and on "free trade," both of which Sirota wrote about eloquently, came straight out of the leadership. Never mind the handful of "Blue Dogs" who might as well be Republicans; Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, and Emanuel, the entire top rank of Congress, can hardly be considered "renegades." At this point, they ARE the Democratic Party.

They have placed progressive Democrats in a completely untenable position. In effect, you've been thrown out of the Party. You can't be at home there anymore. It's like beating your head on a brick wall to change the thing. For all the work that's been done by good people like Sirota and personal friends of mine, for all the voters did to turn out the Republicans, the result is a giant thumb in the eye from the leadership of Congress - and of the Party.

Any idea what you're going to do about it?

There IS a peace party in the US, which stands up for progressive values. It is the Greens, and yes, we need all the help we can get.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Are we all bystanders now? Posted by: Lincoln fan
» RE: Are we all bystanders now? Posted by: sui_generis
» Yabbut . . . Posted by: hagwind
oy
Posted by: sui_generis on Jun 4, 2007 2:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ah yes, let's all form up our Democratic firing squad as early as possible before the elections -- okay everybody, now get in your circle...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just another example that whether GOP or DEMS win
Posted by: leerhok on Jun 5, 2007 8:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
elections, the real winner is Corporate US/Big Money. Their contributions will hand them on a silver platter any and all elections as long as the voters allow it to happen again and again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The two-party system is exactly
Posted by: leerhok on Jun 5, 2007 8:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
like SmallTown having 2 hardware stores and no room for more competition. Could work fine with just two. But not when both are secretly owned by the same interests!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]