Fighting the Urge to Surge

Written by: Alan Goldston on Dec 22, 2006 11:04 AM EST

Linked to groups: DFA Blog Network

“Surge” is the latest iteration of an old and discredited idea, that a strategic blunder can be made right by increasing the investment of time and treasure and blood. 

In 1965, Tom Paxton wrote:

Lyndon Johnson told the nation,    "Have no fear of escalation.    I am trying everyone to please.    Though it isn't really war,    We're sending fifty thousand more,    To help save Viet Nam from Vietnamese."

Successive choruses increased that number to sixty and then a hundred thousand. (Read the full lyrics or listen to the song here: http://www.wellesley.edu/Polisci/wj/Vietimages/Audio/lbj-paxton.html

At the height of its involvement, the United States had over a half million service personnel at one time in Vietnam. As of today, 58,253 of their names appear on the Wall.    

In 1967, Pete Seeger sang on national television a lyric he had written several years earlier, which told allegorically of an army unit on training maneuvers in Louisiana in 1942, being pushed to ford a river of unknown depth by a cocksure and fatally ignorant officer, despite the cautionary questions of the more experienced sergeant.  Only after the captain had drowned was the sergeant able to save his men.    Listen to it here:  http://madmustard.com/2006/09/waist-deep-in-the-big-muddy/ 

The chorus had an acidic edge: 

“We were waist deep in the Big Muddy,
And the big fool says to push on.” 

I read Fred Kaplan’s December 20, 2006 post on Slate (The Urge to Surge, the latest bad idea from Iraq.  http://www.slate.com/id/2155904), which methodically debunks the neo-con argument for increasing American troops in Iraq.  As I read, I couldn’t help thinking back four decades to That Other War of false premises and ideologically blinkered thinking.  Please read it yourself; if you agree, maybe it would help to forward a copy to each of our Senators and Congressmen, with your message urging that they stand fast against the Administration’s efforts to continue this war.   

As I write this, one of my son’s friends, a young Marine back from his first tour in Iraq, awaits orders to return, and my niece, a National Guardsman, is wondering when her unit will be sent over there.  My holiday wish for them is that our Congress stand up to this Administration, and put an end to American military involvement in the Iraqi civil war. 

Alan Goldston, Chair

Democracy for Westchester

Can We Have a Progressive Realpolitik?

Written by: Alan Goldston on Nov 29, 2006 8:57 AM EST

Linked to groups: DFA Blog Network

Chris Bowers, at mydd.com,proposes eight rules for a progressive realpolitik.  I'd like to hear your thoughts.  This is what he proposes:

Eight Rules for Progressive Realpolitik 

by Chris Bowers, Tue Nov 28, 2006 at 07:41:40 PM EST

1. The Democratic Party is the primary vessel of the progressive coalition. It is impossible to enact real change without an electoral apparatus within your movement. In a two-party system, it is thus necessary to adopt one of the two parties as the electoral vessel of your coalition.

2. Within the coalition, intra-party democracy must always be adhered to. All party nominees must be determined by an elective primary open to all registered members of the party in the relevant district. The winner of the primary must always be supported by all members of the party apparatus, and all rank and file members should vote for the nominee (especially those who voted in the primary).

3. Party elections should be fair and open to all members of the party, and no one should ever be forced or muscled off of a ballot for a party office or nomination for public office.

4. There are no litmus tests to join the coalition. No one has to read or sign off on any document stating support for a particular policy. If someone wants to join, registering as a Democrat should be the only requirement.

5. Under no circumstances should any member of the party apparatus support any member of any opposing coalition, (in other words, any other political party).

6. Outside of issues relating to corruption, Democrats must never criticize each other in the same manner that Republicans criticize Democrats.

7. No Democrat should ever publicly call any Democrat unelectable, or publicly rank candidates based on perceived electability.

8. Don't expect the party to change on it's own. Be prepared and willing to change it yourself.

Bowers continues:

It is not easy to follow all of these rules, but I firmly believe that the more of us who adhere to these rules, the better off the Democratic Party and the progressive movement will be. Following these rules would prevent apathy, create accepted mechanisms to handle intra-party disputes, not require anyone to defend corruption, give all members forums to defend their principles, and go a long way toward preventing individual members from undermining the coalition.

I try to follow all of these rules. I see them as my eight pragmatic laws of progressive Realpolitk. I do not try and follow them for their own sake, or out of some sort of high-minded idealism. Rather, I firmly and honestly believe that the more progressive stray from these rules, the less likely they are to enact the sort of progressive change they desire. If you ask me, every time a progressive violates one of these rules, s/he undermines his or her own desire for progressive change.

I did not arrive at these rules overnight, or all at once. Further, I used to violate quite a few of them myself on a regular basis. However, I just grew tired of not achieving anything, and of the country continuing to slide to the right while the left-center refused to work together. I think these rules solve that problem. At this point, few things drive me more nuts than watching any Democrat, whether s/he is in the leadership, the activist working class, or the rank and file violate these rules. Virtually all of my most vehement writing against individual Democrats takes place when I see a particularly egregious violation of these rules take place. This goes for Ellen Tauscher trashing the left just as much as it goes for Pennsylvania progressives who refuse to vote for Bob Casey after working for a different Democrat in the primary. If you want to know a way to get on my bad side, suggest a course of action that openly violates these rules.

OK, now what do you think? Let's hear from you?

 

Journal News Endorses Hall, States the Non-Partisan Case

Written by: Alan Goldston on Oct 29, 2006 10:37 AM EST

Linked to groups: Democracy For Westchester

In past years, the Journal News, the major paper in Westchester, has been a sometimes tepid supporter of Sue Kelly. Not anymore. In an editorial in today's paper, the Journal News eloquently states the non-partisan case for John Hall, and gives him its endorsement.

Pass this along to your fence-sitting friends.

********
The Journal News

Our choice for 19th Congressional District
(Original publication: October 29, 2006)

Republican Sue Kelly of Katonah describes herself as "a quiet leader.'' Her opponent, Democrat John Hall, calls himself a "creative'' one. Kelly looks to her 12 years representing the 19th Congressional District in Washington as productive ones, bringing "a lot of money home'' to the district and working very hard on behalf of constituents. Hall wants change, to end "government for sale" and to "get Washington working for our families again.''

We believe that residents of the far-flung district, which spans the Lower Hudson Valley, want the same thing. We recommend Hall, a musician-activist and former school district and local-government official, to district voters in the Nov. 7 election. Driving our call for change: Need for more independence, more critical thinking, less slaving devotion to party ideology - and party mistakes. Kelly has offered none of this.

Since 1994, when the Republicans' "Contract With America'' was made - and since broken - Kelly has been the consummate GOP soldier, loyally marching in step and even quickening the pace with George Bush in the White House. While our Editorial Board has variously applauded some of Kelly's efforts - for instance, on behalf of the Veterans Affairs Hospital in Montrose - it has not been without reservation. We have been increasingly weary and distressed by her uncritical assessment of the Iraq war - at junctures where a frank assessment by the GOP faithful might actually have altered policy and saved lives.

We similarly have been disappointed by her utter lack of concern about well-chronicled excesses under the "war on terror" and Patriot Act; we have lamented her lack of concern about Washington fiscal policies (she once attributed record-high deficits to bad weather); we have been disappointed as she opposed a federal ban on some assault weapons; we have lamented her lukewarm notice of the need for campaign-finance reform. We are long past tired of being disappointed. For a change, this time, there is a suitable alternative.

Hall understands the disappointment felt by voters. He advocates a planned withdrawal of American troops from Iraq; Kelly is waiting for a high-profile study team to recommend changes. Hall sees universal health coverage as a way out of the nation's high-cost medical-care crisis. He wants to invest in new technologies as part of a national energy policy. And he has a history of grass-roots fighting to protect the environment - well beyond singing about it. The Kelly campaign has enjoyed mocking him for his activist roots.

Due to redistricting, the 19th District's borders in 2002 morphed from northern Westchester and all of Putnam, expanding north to cover most of Dutchess County, traveling through northern Rockland County, then gobbling up most of Orange County all the way to the New Jersey and Pennsylvania borders. The district is a fascinating mix of suburban wealth, rural quiet, farmland and small-town struggles. While not quite a microcosm of New York state - the district lacks big cities and their problems - the 19th does bridge upstate with downstate, even reflecting "middle America'' and its struggles. Hall, who served as a school board trustee and president, and in the Ulster County Legislature, today lives in Dover Plains in Dutchess County.

In 2002 and 2004, Kelly faced inexperienced challengers as she sought another two-year term. Not this year. As a sign of fomenting demand for change in the 19th district, Democrats held a hotly contested primary with four people eager to take on Kelly. Hall emerged head and shoulders above his opponents, who quickly threw him their support. In her few appearances with Hall this campaign, Kelly charged him with wanting to raise taxes, which he has denied. In fact, he said he would support tax increases targeted at oil companies that have made record profits at consumers' expense.

On immigration, Kelly said more attention must be paid to securing the Canada border. She supported legislation to build a wall to stem illegal immigration from Mexico, and backs the Bush administration's proposed guest laborer plan to let immigrants work in the U.S. temporarily. Hall said he would not back amnesty for all illegal immigrants, but said he would support a compromise that would lead to citizenship for some, especially families with American-born children. Hall opposes construction of a wall along the Mexico border, likening it to the Berlin Wall, a symbol, he said, that would further damage the U.S. image abroad.

For a while, the Hall campaign sought to link Kelly to the sex scandal involving House pages and former Rep. Mark Foley, the Florida Republican who was forced to resign Sept. 29; some of the allegations coincided with Kelly's term as chairwoman of the Page Board. She has denied knowing anything of Foley's conduct contemporaneous with her Page Board leadership, insisting that if she had known, she would have taken action. That scandal, still playing out, hardly informs our decision. There are more challenging problems facing our nation, the 19th Representative District, and the Lower Hudson Valley. We believe Hall is the better candidate to tackle them.

The Times Herald Record Endorses ..... John Hall

Written by: Alan Goldston on Oct 22, 2006 4:34 PM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For Westchester

I just noticed that the recordonline.com, the web version of the Times Herald Record, a moderate-to-conservative Hudson Valley newspaper, today posted that paper's editorial endorsement of John Hall. For those who want to read it directly, or forward the link to friends, it is

www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.d...

For the rest of us, who are too lazy to link, but want something to share around, here's the full text. Pass it on!

"For Congress: Hall over Kelly
The 19th District needs a new set of eyes, one that can see if the emperor is naked.October 22, 2006
There comes a time in our personal and professional lives when we must be held accountable for what we do, or don't do. When we explain who we really are, what we really stand for. This is Sue Kelly's time and she has failed miserably. With her steadfast allegiance to the Bush administration's handling of the war in Iraq and blind loyalty to a House Republican leadership that has condoned, covered up or contributed directly to corrupt politics while ignoring the needs of hard-pressed middle-class Americans, she has forfeited her right to re-election to Congress. Instead, we encourage voters in the 19th Congressional District to send a new voice with different ideas, and loyalties, to Washington, D.C. -- John Hall, the Democratic candidate.

Kelly came into Congress a dozen years ago with the Newt Gingrich-led GOP sweep and its famous "Contract With America" that promised reform of how the House of Representatives was run by Democrats. For her part, Kelly reserved the right to pick and choose on the contract, but pledged to work for "a smaller, smarter government which is more accountable to the American people." The GOP-led federal government may be many things, but smaller, smarter and more accountable are not among them. Kelly's sin is not necessarily that her vision has not been realized, but that she almost unfailingly defends what has been delivered instead.

Asked in a debate at the Record's offices about the various scandals, excessive spending and botched White House efforts in Iraq -- all attributable to Republicans -- Kelly insisted that's "not where my focus should be." Rather, she said, "My focus is on the 19th Congressional District. I've helped bring jobs here. I've helped to make sure our environment is safe. I've helped bring money to schools, hospitals. I've done a great deal of work for the people here. That's where the focus should be."

Sorry, congresswoman, the I've-brought-home-the-bacon argument is not enough this year. Not when Americans are demanding accountability for a costly botched war and are anxious about a federal government that seems to operate without any checks and balances. She says looking back at Iraq, on which she has supported the president, is "second-guessing." Hall more accurately describes it as "avoiding responsibility."

Yes, it is important now to find a viable way out, but ignoring the mistakes that got us there will lead to similar mistakes in the future. There is nothing wrong with admitting mistakes or being saddened by colleagues' misdeeds; there is a good deal wrong with trying to avoid dealing with them.

Certainly Kelly, whom we have endorsed in the past, has done some good for the district, brought in money and helped with constituent problems, but being in the House majority for 12 years should guarantee. What is at stake, however, as it was 12 years ago, is the public trust. Americans need to know that their elected representatives are working for them, not working to save their own cushy jobs in Washington. Sad to say, Kelly sounds like too many other Republican candidates this year, trying to defend the indefensible.
.
As for Hall, he is not merely a token candidate, filling out a ballot line for the Democratic Party. If he were, we would have to think twice about replacing Kelly. A former leader of the rock group Orleans and a former Ulster County legislator, Hall is articulate and well-versed on the issues. He favors universal health care and wants to narrow the gap between the rich and everyone else. He worries about the country's growing debt.

"I'm not a professional politician," he says. "I'm a citizen running for office." OK, he's a citizen with the financial backing of a lot of not-so-average Americans. But when he looks at Iraq, he doesn't think Donald Rumsfeld knows more about it than he does and when he looks at the House page scandal, he doesn't need more facts to condemn Speaker Dennis Hastert's handling of it.

Some things are obvious, or ought to be, whatever one's political affiliation. The problem with Kelly and too many of her party colleagues is that they have been looking the other way for so long they can't focus on the problems today. The district needs a new set of eyes and a new commitment to a smaller, smarter, more accountable government."

Coming Down the Homestretch

Written by: Alan Goldston on Oct 21, 2006 10:45 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For Westchester

Member
Two weeks and two days from now, we will elect a new Congress. How new is up to those who choose to get involved. Today, I have three points I'd like you to consider.

First, the landscape -- or rather, seascape, since some of the more sober independent analysts like Charlie Cook have been talking in terms of a potential tsunami. Polls, generic and head-to-head, across the country are suggesting that -- magic words of fantasy -- if the election were held today, the Democrats will regain control of the House of Representatives, and possibly the Senate. For some good reading on this, take a look at Charlie Cook's October 17 piece in the National Journal "The Blue Wave of the Future". www.cookpolitical.com/column/200...
For a good synopsis of where the various predictions are, take a look at the post "State of Play" by DemfromCT on Daily Kos, October 20.

Second, the reality -- all of these polls, forecasts and predictions make assumptions based on turnout models. In other words, it's not just who likes whom, but who's likely to actually show up on election day. Money will undoubtedly be important in massaging public opinion and voter motivation. Chris Bowers of Daily Kos is pushing the excellent idea that incumbent Democrats with big warchests and no battle -- i.e. no serious challenger -- should pony up some big money to the national effort, to be redirected to some of the Democratic "reach" districts. Take a look at the chart that Bowers prepared of overfunded safe Democrats, www.mydd.com/images/user/217/Use... and consider making a call or sending an email to encourage a Congressperson in your state to seize the moment, and make a difference to increase the depth of a potential Democratic victory.

Third, regardless of how good the polling looks, money alone doesn't get people to vote. Maximizing the favorable vote takes people power -- and in the case of usually underfunded Democrats, that means volunteer labor. Ironically, that labor becomes more, not less, important, as the Democratic candidates' ratings improve. So, as I've said repeatedly, there is no excuse whatsoever for sitting on your butt when we have so many good candidates out there who can use your help on the phones, door-to-door, and on election day.

Let me be blunt: if you cared enough to log into this website, or get onto this mailing list, you know you care how this election comes out, and you aren't going to be comfortable as a passive spectator. Passivity is an option for baseball and football fans, but not for an informed electorate. This is for real, and its for my kids and yours. So, right now, go to www.johnhallforcongress.com, and follow the links to volunteer.

Rather be involved locally? OK: Andrea Stewart-Cousins can take an important State Senate seat with your help. Go to andrea2006.com, and volunteer. Now.

Finally, Democracy for Westchester will be hosting a campaign stories event, after the election, and the one requirement for admission will be that you have your own campaign story to tell. Go out, join the people's army and become a campaign veteran.

Alan Goldston, Chair
Democracy for Westchester

Take a Walk this weekend with Andrea Stewart-Cousins

Written by: Alan Goldston on Oct 19, 2006 7:14 PM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For Westchester

Member

Just a quick note to invite you to help Andrea Stewart-Cousins this Saturday, October 21, just by showing up to take a walk with Andrea at the Greenburgh Nature Center.
Andrea will be at the Nature center from 2 pm this Saturday, and we want her accompanied by many, many buttoned and stickered supporters in a public show of strength. It costs nothing but an hour of your time, and, hey, you need the exercise!

Just call Chris (of the AS-C campaign) at 646-345-3592, to let him know you'll be there, and to get details.

See you there?

Alan Goldston, Chair
Democracy for Westchester

Cook Report Update: Wave Keeps Building, But Take Nothing For Granted

Written by: Alan Goldston on Oct 7, 2006 10:57 PM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For Westchester

The movement shown by the latest Cook Political Report ratings for the House of Representatives is almost eerie. No presently Democratic seat anywhere in the US is considered highly vulnerable (a so-called "tossup"), while three presently Republican seats are now listed as leaning Democratic, a whopping twenty-five Republican seats are now listed as "toss-ups", and another thirty-one Republican seats are listed as either competitive or potentially competitive.

In New York, a stunning seven Republican seats are now rated as in play, two of them as tossups, two as barely leaning Republican, and three more as potentially competitive.

But, as I say every time I do this segment, not one vote has yet been cast. Find a race, get involved and make a difference. It's doable. Be the wave.

For those of you in Westchester, there is simply no excuse not to get involved in the John Hall campaign for the 19th Congressional District.
Go, right now, to www.johnhallforcongress.com/home... and sign up for telephone canvassing from your own home, using this incredibly neat internet setup that the Hall campaign has implemented. Or work the phonebanks in Mt. Kisco or White Plains.

And, yes, I intend to keep this up right through election day.

Alan Goldston, Chair
Democracy for Westchester

League of Women Voters Calls Out Nick Spano for Cheating, Lying

Written by: Alan Goldston on Oct 6, 2006 4:33 PM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For Westchester

You know 20-year incumbent Nick Spano must be desperate when even the strictly non-partisan League of Women Voters finds that he's cheating, with false and deceptive advertising.

In his effort to hold on against challenger (and DFW endorsee) Andrea Stewart-Cousins, Spano tried, by direct mail and TV ads, to tag Stewart-Cousins with responsibility for the controversial relocation of a homeless shelter to a spot within the 35th Senatorial district. Now the Fair Campaign Practices Committee of the universally respected League of Women Voters has determined that Spano's ads were "unfair, misleading, and inflammatory." The shelter in question was not only not within Stewart-Cousins' County legislative district, it wasn't even subject to any vote of the Board of County Legislators, all of which Spano certainly knew. In short, with his deceptive and inflammatory advertising, Nick Spano tried to con the public into blaming Stewart-Cousins for something that actually happened within Spano's legislative district, and on his watch.

This might all be surprising if we forgot, for a moment, that Spano takes his campaign strategy and tactics straight from the Republican book of foul plays and dirty tricks. We deserve better than Nick Spano, but we'll have to earn it to make it so.

The 35th Senatorial District deserves to be represented by an honest Democrat, and New York deserves a Democratic State Senate. That is why Democracy for Westchester proudly stands with Andrea Stewart-Cousins, and urges all of its members to give both money and time to help her campaign bring Democracy to the 35th District, and New York into the 21st century.

This race is likely to be close, and your involvement could really make a difference. To donate $5, $500 or $5000, go NOW to www.andrea2006.com/donate.... To sign up as a volunteer, even if its only for an hour or two, go to www.andrea2006.com/actioncenter....

Alan Goldston, Chair
Democracy for Westchester

Attend White Plains Monthly Forum on October 5!

Written by: Alan Goldston on Oct 4, 2006 9:06 AM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For Westchester

Dear Member,

Next week, on October 10, DFW hosts a free screening of the new film "Iraq for Sale". If you haven't already RSVP'd, log into DFAlink now, and get on our early admissions list to be sure of seating.

But this week, in fact tomorrow -- Thursday -- night is our regular White Plains open meeting. This will be an important meeting, at which we'll look at opportunities to impact key state and federal races.

Senate: Aldon Hynes, DFA organizer/activist from nearby Stamford CT and the Lamont campaign, will give us an insider's look at what's happening in the campaign to bring Ned Lamont to the Senate, and retire DINO (Democrat In Name Only) Lieberman.

House: Alan Goldston, DFW Chair, will share a confidential briefing on exciting insider polling in the John Hall campaign, not available to the media or general public.

State Senate: Two local candidates for State Senate, Andrea Stewart-Cousins and Mike Kaplowitz, may be two of the four pickups needed to change control of the NY State Senate. Opportunities to help in those campaigns will be discussed.

Open forum: Everyone gets to sound off!


Event Date: Thursday, October 5, 2006
Event Time: 7:00 PM

Venue Name: United Methodist Church
Address: 250 Bryant Avenue
City: White Plains
State: NY
Zip Code: 10605
Handicapped Accessible: Y
Please attend White Plains Monthly Forum on Thursday, October 5, 2006 at 7:00 PM. You can RSVP at:

www.dfalink.com/event.php?id=806...

What: White Plains Monthly Forum
When: Thursday, October 5, 2006, 7:00 PM
Where: United Methodist Church
250 Bryant Avenue
White Plains NY 10605

Why Republican Sue Kelly Avoids Debates

Written by: Alan Goldston on Sep 27, 2006 4:27 PM EDT

Linked to groups: Democracy For Westchester

John Hall, Democratic candidate for New York's 19th Congressional District, has challenged incumbent Sue Kelly to debate once in each of the five counties that make up the District, before live audiences of 19th District voters.

The League of Women Voters has proposed a public, face to face, debate between John Hall and Sue Kelly on Monday, October 16 at 7:30 PM at the Somers Public Library. John Hall has accepted, Sue Kelly has not accepted as yet.

In fact, I understand that on Hall's challenge of five debates, Sue Kelly (through a spokesman) says no, but she might be willing to appear at most once, in the safe confines of a TV studio, just a few days before the election. Why are Kelly's managers advising her to avoid real debates?

Kelly's history suggests some answers.

First, Sue Kelly has been taking her instructions from the party bosses in Washington for twelve years. She hasn't had a serious challenger ever. So thinking for herself is not her strength, and answering unscripted questions from real voters might be embarrassing.

Second, in a single appearance, in a TV studio, with the usual two minute - one minute - thirty second rhythm and no follow ups, she could get away with memorizing little vaguely-topical speechlets for the predictable questions, she'd have six weeks to learn her lines, and if she screwed up, there'd be little time for the word to get around. But five debates, starting soon, would mean that she'd have to speak for herself, and that people would be watching.

Third, Kelly just doesn't DO speaking for herself. Out here in the real world, she hardly speaks at all, and never without a prepared text. For the last twelve years, she's been communicating with her district exclusively by press release, or through spokesmen, or by little set speeches on ceremonial occasions. In Washington, she doesn't have to speak at all, just listen, and follow orders, and schmooze with lobbyists. When she socializes back in the District, she travels in very exclusive circles (like the Goldens Bridge Hunt Club, where a select few can "ride to the houndswhere) and can trust that she won't be quoted.

Fourth, multiple debates would make it very hard to continue faking a record of performance. Like claiming to be pro-environment, on symbolic votes, although she is consistently against the environment whenever her vote matters. In a series of appearances, she might be pressed to explain her miserable performance on seniors issues, veterans issues, education, healthcare, energy, and shifting the tax burden from the rich to the middle class. I can't think of a credible explanation that would be acceptable to voters in the 19th District, and her handlers would rather that word not get around.

Fifth, five debates would mean Kelly being seen, and photographed, five times in public, identified as a REPUBLICAN, something she's trying very hard to avoid these days. I think that she should be pressed to tell us all why she's proud to be a Republican, and why she's has proudly supported the most extreme right-wing elements of the Republican Party. And that's not likely to happen in a single, last-minute televised debate.

All things considered, multiple, real debates before a live audience, answering the questions of real voters would be a good thing for the voters of the 19th Congressional District, and a good thing for democracy. But it might be a bad thing for Sue Kelly. And I, for one, do not anticipate Kelly will put the interests of her District ahead of the advice of her managers.

Alan Goldston, Chair
Democracy for Westhester