Replies

It is because of FR that His Slickness was impeached.

Maybe you think that was a great victory. To me it was like watching a horror movie. I was as riled up as anybody on this forum about what that guy did. To watch the American people reward him with ever-higher approval ratings as impeachment approached, was like getting hit over the head with a board. If ever there was a reminder that I am a statistical outlyer, totally out of step with the American electorate, that was it.

Yes, the House of Representatives did a gutsy thing there, and we probably did play a hand in it. Some of the House Managers have said we did. And we put an indelible asterisk next to Clinton's name in the history books. I regret none of what I did there. But the whole time I felt like I was being punched in the stomach by my fellow Americans, who seemed to be saying that lying under oath was just fine. We got trounced there, Pod. Let's not sugarcoat that, either.

All of the things you list are good examples of "the fanatic's role in history." No one would argue that fanatics don't have a role. And I would never argue that we had no effect on events. But that's our position in the scheme of things: the fanatic's role. What we were talking about on this thread was winning elections, and that is by definition not one of the fanatic's roles. Winning elections is not about small numbers of highly-motivated people. If it was, Dean would be cruising to the nomination right now.

"I felt like I was being punched in the stomach by my fellow Americans, who seemed to be saying that lying under oath was just fine."

Been quite common as the history books show. I'm just tired of being punch in the gut by supposed patriots.

"Maybe you think that was a great victory. To me it was like watching a horror movie. I was as riled up as anybody on this forum about what that guy did. To watch the American people reward him with ever-higher approval ratings as impeachment approached, was like getting hit over the head with a board. If ever there was a reminder that I am a statistical outlyer, totally out of step with the American electorate, that was it."

Is that an excuse or a reason to sit down and STFU!!!??

I don't think so.

We go back a ways. I respect you too much and I think you respect me too much to trivialize this.

Fact is w/o FR, the HoR would not have sent the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate (not like they did anything useful with them).

"Yes, the House of Representatives did a gutsy thing there, and we probably did play a hand in it. Some of the House Managers have said we did. And we put an indelible asterisk next to Clinton's name in the history books. I regret none of what I did there. But the whole time I felt like I was being punched in the stomach by my fellow Americans, who seemed to be saying that lying under oath was just fine. We got trounced there, Pod. Let's not sugarcoat that, either."

I understand completely your position. To some degree, i agree with it.

Guess I would rather be thought of as a "fanatic" than someone w/ lukewarm spit in his mouth [reference to the New Testament book Revelations there].

To me it was like watching a horror movie

I feel like I'm watching one now. Earlier today, there were people suggesting (seriously) that W would pick up another state or two if he replaced Cheney with a liberal like Giuliani.

Simple as recasting a part in a soap opera.

"Yes, the House of Representatives did a gutsy thing there, and we probably did play a hand in it. Some of the House Managers have said we did. And we put an indelible asterisk next to Clinton's name in the history books. I regret none of what I did there."

Yes indeed. My Liberal Clinton-supporting Mom last month was saying "Clinton was never impeached" and I corrected her, with an explanation of the exact process. It was a pleasure to correct her. Without House impeachment, the whole matter would have been whitewashed, to the detriment of the Office of President.

"But the whole time I felt like I was being punched in the stomach by my fellow Americans, who seemed to be saying that lying under oath was just fine. We got trounced there, Pod. Let's not sugarcoat that, either."

NO, I disagree. The American people just dont have the guts to carry through rigorous moral judgments, this is the result of our post-60s moral laxity. But WE DIDNT LOSE. (Maybe I felt different, since I knew all along that Clinton had enough Liberal Democrat enablers to survive removal.) Those unwilling to face reality lost. In the end, the stain as you point out is indelible. Our 2nd impeached President. Now, look at 2000. Consider that Gore had peace and prosperity on his side but couldnt put together a majority.

The Clinton overhang was there and was real.

"Winning elections is not about small numbers of highly-motivated people."

Actually it partly is -- DO NOT make the mistake of confusing Dean's failures with a failure of the principle of insurgent politics or activism. HERE IS THE TRUTH: If we hadnt captured Saddam *and* if Dean had a better temperment, his lead would have held and we would be discussing how "the internet changes everything". Voter decisions turned on a few critical pieces of information - they decided Dean the candidate was flawed wrt character ('too angry') and rejected him.

The fanatics are not the voters. But fanatics *WITH* an appealing message and/or candidate is the right formula for success.