To have and have not

Senate Democrats blew it. Strategically they took one step forward and then two back tactically, the one familiar battle maneuver of the modern Democratic Party.

I write, of course, about the filibuster-agreement affair. Its short and unhappy life was, for the Democratic Party, good public relations in a bad bargain. Senate Dems came out on top for a change.

They managed to deflect an obstructionist public image -- never mind the image’s fairness; it was there -- while obtaining an open promise from the opposition that the judicial filibuster was fair game down the road; most importantly, in the case of Supreme Court nominations. The controversial slate of judges at hand was going to be confirmed anyway as fallout from the nuclear option, so why not score a major p.r. point in the process by looking like the reasonable ones? It was a smart move.

Now I’m not so naïve as to think Republican leaders were going to live up to the deal. That, I thought, was the whole point of Democrats brokering the deal to begin with, and was what made it so deliciously Machiavellian. They could sit and wait for the inevitable betrayal and then savage the GOP for what it is: a bunch of bullies who were poised all along to violate both the letter and spirit of the filibuster agreement. That prospect was -- and I emphasize was -- as certain as George again uttering “nucular.”

But, for Democrats, a high-flying strategy is merely an opportunity to shoot it down by shooting from the hip. In their case that means shooting themselves in the hip, which is what they promptly did in shooting down the confirmation vote on Bolton. This fringe ideologue has, just as the three appellate judges had, an excellent chance of being confirmed no matter what, and Democrats had already made their objections resoundingly clear. Stalling his confirmation made them no clearer.

But more importantly, stalling this near-certain conclusion of a farce by choking cloture only handed Senate Republicans a p.r. victory they’ll use to use to batter and ridicule the Dems mercilessly -- and in the eyes of an issue-muddled public, even justifiably.

It’s true that the brokered deal pertained only to judicial-nomination filibusters. As one of the Gang-of-14 Republicans allowed (mostly out of self-defense), "It is unfortunate. It is too bad. But the deal was on judges, not anything else."

Yet that nicety will almost certainly be lost on the public. To the great majority it was a filibuster deal, period. And there’s no doubt that’s how the GOP will exploit it, notwithstanding any mild protestations from its bipartisan moderates.

The Democrats could not have handed a prettier p.r. package to Senate majority leader Bill Frist, who had survived the parliamentary scuffle only as badly damaged goods. He never wanted the deal and was certain to look for any sleazy opening to break it. To no one’s surprise he already has, saying "actions speak volumes" in reference to the Bolton-confirmation vote and the Democratic pledge to rein in filibustering. "Tonight, after the Democrats have launched into yet another filibuster of a presidential nomination," he said, "those words seem empty and hollow."

Like all politics, this fight was about p.r. perceptions. That was the key to the filibuster deal. The Democrats held the cards for a change. With utter confidence in the inevitable, they could have waited for the GOP to trash the deal once it met with Supreme resistance. Then out the nuclear option would have come. But with the deal’s “spirit” still in place and still unmolested, the GOP would have had real problems with a disapproving public. It would have been the clear-cut bully.

Such Democratic bumbling gets tiresome to watch.

Comments

[Marblex]

Uhm...the "deal" was on judicial nominees. Now, of course we know that the demented dominionist extremists want to neuter opposition for good. But for now, they'll just have to wait to steal the next election. Oh...and you know they will...just as they have stolen the last three national elections.

[harry reid]

p.m.

You know we're going to cave in anyway, so do yourself a favor and come to terms with reality. Machiavellian? Flattering, but after all these years you should realize Senate Democrats are Gomer Pyleian.

[Cynic]

The Dems should just shoot back when Frist et al try to filibuster the stem cell research bill. Silly majority leader, a filibuster is a filibuster.

[Des]

I disagree.

First and foremost, the Dems have got to gain the public's trust again as fighters.

They have a HUGE credibility problem that is the reason that though Repubs have been screwing up big-time, it hasn't resulted in a ratings bonanza for Dems.

The public doesn't trust them anymore.

The only way to change this is to fight.

Loudly and often.

Even if they lose, they go down fighting.

They show the American people that they have the spine to fight the Pubs and maybe if they accomplish that, they may EARN the right to lay out their case to America as to why they should trust THEM and NOT Pubs with their national security.

Right now, they don't have that right.
They've got to learn to crawl before they can walk.

So yes, fight on Bolton--even if you lose.

Fight on stem cell research--even if you lose.

Fight on health care--even if you lose.

And DAMN sure fight on Social Security--if you want to KEEP your job.
Des

[Chris]

In response to Des:

That is certianally a valid strategy. I think the problem was less with the strategy, but a lack of willingness to stick to it. If they had played out their cards, or gone down fighting, either one would work. Instead, they took the worst ends of each. Just because I like what the Dems stand for (in some respects) doesn't mean that I like the way they go about it.

[serena1313]

I agree with Des. Even if the dems have a small chance or a huge chance of winning or a sure loss they've got to fight for the public interests, but without using the republican tactics. In other words keep integrity in-tact. Do not emulate the GOP as they have become -- are becoming -- transparently deceitful. That is disappointing. By the same token that does not ensure democrats of an automatic win either.

If dems are going to regain any semblance of credibility they have to do more than pay lip-service. I think most people realize that the dems are at a disadvantage, but if they don't try why should they be re-elected. They need to earn their position otherwise they are fired!

Many people I know do not want to vote for candidates just because they are democrat or republican; we want people in office who will make a concerted effort to bring civility back to both chambers and bring balance back into politics and work in tandem with the public's interest as well as with business and the nation's economic interests. Hopefully this will be accomplished in the near future.

I say fire those that do not and start anew.

[dwvr]

PM Carpenter is forgetting one very important detail. No matter what happens, the corporate media will propagandize against the Democratic Party.

When the Democratic politicians begin to ignore the corporate media, then we will see some real change. But as long as they react to the corporate media instead of doing the right thing, we will have the so-called Republican Party in control of our country and destroying our liberty.

-dwvr

[Chris]

I must agree with PM Carpenter that the Democrats continually screw up strategy. Regardless of what we all think their strategy should be, can we agree that it isn't what they're doing now?

[moonsha]

The problem is that Democrats tend to be a party represented by free thinkers. Although I consider this to be a strength, it can also be a weakness as we are seeing here. Democrats need to decide on what the hell they are going to do then stay on message. Only reason Republicans are effective in lying is that they have to be. When you are selling junk, the sales pitch has to be near perfect in order for someone to buy it. All Democrats in Congress need to do is call a spade a spade. If someone is lying, then say they are. In many respects, people get too caught up in strategy. The American people are starved for the truth which is precisely why Congress has a pathetic approval rating. We want straight talk. Put up or shut up! If Republicans continue to try to cut off debate, backdoor provisions on appropriation bills, and change rules when it suits them, Democrats need to call press conferences and keep the message simple. Democrats need to take note of Barbara Boxer because she has come out fighting. Whether you agree with her points of view, you have to love her passion to do what is right.

[Grandma M]

The Bolton delay is partly about the White House trying to subordinate the Senate, instead of treating it as the founding fathers intended- a CO EQUAL branch of government.

When Bolton was first nominated the Administration promised openess and to provide whatever information was requested. Even Republicans Chariman Lugar and Senator McCain have requested the information be given to congress.

Arguing or explaining to Republicans and many TV numbed Americans is pointless.

All Progressives NOW have to say over and over is:

They said they would give the information. Now they won't. WHAT ARE THEY COVERING UP?? WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???

Said just that way, it turns the focus back where it belongs and becomes another and substaintial PR victory for Dems.

[Sue]

I agree with Grandma M's comments. I hope the Democrats won't cave in and will remain strong re having the White House release the documents that they are asking for and to which they are entitled as a separate but equal branch of our government. It's the principle that they have to find the courage to defend! Sadly, I'm afraid the Democrats are going to cave. I'm truly hoping they'll surprise us!!