State of Denial

Every year at State of the Union time, I look for one key sign that all is as it should be in the House chamber: Eliot Engel's giant head. My large-noggined Representative plants himself on the aisle, down front, well ahead of the President's arrival each and every year - more the better for getting that TV time that Congressmen crave.

And, yes, there it is! The MSNBC cameras picked it up. The Congressional Cranium has been spotted, nodding furiously at Hillary Clinton. Okay, the Republic still stands. The House and Senate are gathered. Engel gets his spotlight and the sergeant at arms can do his duty.

9:05 - The pre-game question seems to be centered on whether Bush can change the story away from the national disaster that is Iraq to issues like the environment, immigration and health care. The answer is no, short of a massive bombshell.

9:09 - Here's Bush, skipping many Democrats I notice, including poor Eliot Engel. He did kiss Jean Schmidt, the hateful warmonger from Ohio, however.

9:11 - Nancy Pelosi's career moment, shaking the President's hand in a spot occupied heretofore only by politicians of my particular gender. "You ready to go?" Bush asks Pelosi. "Welcome, Mr. President," she answers, and she introduces him. The President's gracenote in congratulating Pelosi has the chamber echoing.

9:17 - More enterprise. Uh-huh. "The country is on the move." So is Barbara O'Brien, who's live-blogging and get details I'd miss. This is annoying, says my daughter, they stand for everything. This is the easy stuff, I say. Wait a while.

9:22 - Still mom and apple pie. Math and science skills. Dems sitting on hands for no child left behind. Cheney adjusting underwear, apparently. Pelosi looks composed.

9:25 - Affordable health care. Savings accounts. Small business. Helping the states. Nothing national. "Junk lawsuits." Did Pfizer write this speech?

9:27 - Immigration. Ooooh. This could be good. Will the Republicans applaud? "The great tradition of the melting pot." Lots of applause for "comprehensive immigration reform," but of course, that means different things to different pols - especially those who support vigilante groups and oppose any expanded guest worker programs or amnesty.

9:31 - His big proposal - cutting gas usage by 20% in ten years.

9:33 - Heh-heh, heh-heh. He said "global climate change." Heh-heh, heh-heh. I thought Cheney was gonna plotz. Accident Pelosi's wearing green?

9:36 - Macao again. Ed Asner saying Macao is a sound that's going to haunt me to my grave.

9:37 - We all love the troops. Cut to generals. The full standing O.

9:38 - It is me, or is his constant use of "the terrorists" - as if they were a unified, monolithic Reich on the march - just this side of insanity? Does he believe this? Did he really just say Shia and Sunni "have the same wicked purposes?" A decisive ideological struggle - I dunno. The artist asks: "why is he going on and on with this, just to justify himself?" I think she's got it.

9:42 - McCain is asleep.

9:43 - Writes Barbara: "Must … not … throw … lamp … at… television." Easy there, blogger.

9:44 - "Victory" is such an empty word when perched upon those pursed presidential lips.

9:47 - There's nothing new here. The same tired words with a higher death count. "We can expect an epic battle..." Cut to Lieberman. And they do.

9:49 - Dramatic shot of Pelosi sitting quietly with her hands folded, as Cheney and the Republicans stand and applaud.

9:52 - Sendin' civilians abroad to where we need 'em. I thought we called that "Halliburton."

9:54 - We're in laundry list land. There's Teddy Kennedy next to Barak Obama. There's Homer Simpson on my picture in picture.

9:56 - Gallery time. In the paint, there's Dikembe Mut-ummmmmmbbbbboooo. And the foul. And Laura.

9:58 - My cable TV listing has this down as the Jim Webb Pre-Game Show.

10:00 - Hey a New Yorker! Wes Autrey, subway hero, takes a bow.

10:01 - Here's a preview from Webb's speech, as he continues to gain with his populism:

In the early days of our republic, President Andrew Jackson established an important principle of American-style democracy - that we should measure the health of our society not at its apex, but at its base. Not with the numbers that come out of Wall Street, but with the living conditions that exist on Main Street.  We must recapture that spirit today.

10:02 - "God bless"?!? From a deli man, that's a rave.

10:08 - The postgame. Brokaw really hammers Bush is a quiet way: "It was interesting watch him try to glide over Iraq with a list of things we've all heard before and how quiet it was on both sides of the House." Good summation.

10:16 - Senator Webb is on, from his office. Not a great teleprompter man yet, but who cares. He's got two messages. One - most of the middle class is being left behind in this narrow, upscale boom. Two - the war is a disaster. Here's the key passage:

The President took us into this war recklessly.  He disregarded warnings from the national security adviser during the first Gulf War, the chief of staff of the army, two former commanding generals of the Central Command, whose jurisdiction includes Iraq,  the director of operations on the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and many, many others with great integrity and long experience in national security affairs.  We are now, as a nation, held hostage to the predictable - and predicted - disarray that has followed. 

The war's costs to our nation have been staggering. Financially. The damage to our reputation around the world. The lost opportunities to defeat the forces of international terrorism. And especially the precious blood of our citizens who have stepped forward to serve.

The majority of the nation no longer supports the way this war is being fought; nor does the majority of our military.  We need a new direction.  Not one step back from the war against international terrorism.  Not a precipitous withdrawal that ignores the possibility of further chaos.  But an immediate shift toward strong regionally-based diplomacy, a policy that takes our soldiers off the streets of Iraq's cities, and a formula that will in short order allow our combat forces to leave Iraq.

I think I'll leave it there. The team over at DMI will have instant research up very shortly, to check in over there.

Tag: DMIsotu2007

Comments

[steverino]

Cheney looking dyspeptic.

[blue girl]

The Congressional Cranium has been spotted

:)

I started watching, but thought, nah, I'll write a post and keep checking in on Watson to see what's really being said.

[Tom W.]

Cheney seems to be, er, adjusting a lot back there.

[Jason Chervokas]

Congress is so white--white men in blue suits--that it's like watching a historic replay of an Eisenhower address.

[Jason Chervokas]

It's like listening to a cleaned-up, middle aged Jeff Spicoli ....

[Jason Chervokas]

Webb's secret weapons are economic populism and social justice....it was the best part of his stump speech...

But Andrew Jackson as a Democratic hero, that's a historic slight of hand, what's next Reagan?

[Tom W.]

Hey, that's Webb for you....the social justice stuff from a mid-road military man is fascinating to me. The guy's got a future, and he can write a bit too...

[Tom K]

Jason:

Not sure what you mean about Ol' Hickory. You think he was not a Dem. hero? I've always thought of him as one. I know he was pretty much the epitome of un-PC, but the D's of his day were not progressives on slavery, were they, and no one in US politics was pro-Indian. He represented the "common man", which meant the white working man/farmer at the time. The modern D's may not be cool with all that, but they haven't disowned him, have they?

Wiki seems to confirm my impressions, ID'ing him as co-founder of the D party (presumably with Jefferson), and noting the importance of Jacksonian Democracy. Certainly, he was *the* great populist figure of 19th C US presidents. Doesn't the D party have Jefferson-Jackson dinners all the time?

Webb's unabashed endorsement of Andy illustrates the problems Webb poses for today's national D party. But he's on firm ground, historically, in summoning the name. (I note the other two P's he mentioned, Ike and TR, were R's).

Who was the D hero from that era, if not Andy: JQ Adams? Or did I miss your point altogether, causing me to ask a lot of irrelevant questions?

[Tom W.]

TK - you keep trotting out this "Webb as problem for Democrats" meme, when he's clearly a much bigger threat to the Republicans' recent "heartland" themes ownership. A grave threat. Dems love Webb - left, right, and center.

As to Ole Hickory, well yeah but the 19th century democratic party was pro-slavery for much of its existence; very hard to link its past to the party of FDR. Just as it's impossible to link the party of Lincoln (the progressive 'new' party of its day, the party of government might and intervention) to today's Republicans.

[Tom W.]

Indeed, I'd point you to this post by Kos, who sums up Webb's place beautifully:

DailyKos: Memo to the media

[Tom K]

It's not a "meme", it's a fact of life. Either the D party will change, or Webb will, or they'll encounter serious awkwardness. Even more than, say, Olympia Snow and the R's. For my money, the D's would do well to make room for the likes of Webb, but I don't know if they can, in the long term (after their coincident views on Iraq cease to dominate the political landscape) without fundamentally changing who they are.

By the way, what the heck is a "meme", exactly? Is that a fancy way of saying that it's something you don't believe is true? It's defined as a bit of cultural artifact transmitted by repetition, analgous to genes. I have no idea what that means. Maybe the idea that a "meme" is something real is itself a meme, transmitted by mindless repetition of the word "meme" without anyone asking what the hell it means.

As to Andy J, it seems you are saying that, despite being its co-founder and being named in its biggest annual event, he is in fact not properly associated with the modern D party. That may be so: but how does it square with your proposition that Webb fits right in, when he's the one invoking Ol' Hickory without apology?

[Tom W.]

He's a distant historic figure - like Teddy Roosevelt is for Republicans who want to be "rough riders" but really hate interventionist government in any form. Same deal.

Tom, you're just wrong about Webb and your vision of the Democratic Party is on the narrow side. "Make room for the likes of Webb..." are you kiddin' me? He's a freaking star! Umm, they chose him to give the rebuttal on the first national night of their empowerment - hello?

Watch Hillary Clinton. See if you'll be able to slip the thinnest piece of parchment between her positions and Jim Webb's by summertime.

[Slappy]

Awesome speech. Webb's speech that is. Am I watching the spine of the Dem Party grow before my eyes?

Bush is dead meat. I look forward to watching his followers throw him to the wolves.

And where did Webb uphold Jackson as a Democratic hero? If you want to argue the point, use a lower case "d" for goodness sake.

And the founding of the DOP and Dem Party are so far removed from their births, its pointless to even discuss.

Webb is the GOPs worst nightmare. They'd love to run against Hillary or Obama. The cheap shots are easy. Webb not so easy.

[Tom K]

Slappy:

I haven't read "Born Fighting", but this author did, and took away the impression that Andy was Webb's "political hero":

http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=113431&ran=109750

I have read some of Webb's work, and a lot about him (from before he entered politics), and everything I know suggests that he indeed regards Jackson as a hero and role model. Can't find a link to last night's speech, though, so I can't assess just what he said about him (since I don't recall it in detail). We can make that a small d if you like, but the party Webb is in is the big D, and I don't think he's going to allow his attitude toward Jackson to be affected by which case is used.

[Tom K]

Tom:

Read the Kos piece. Two things stood out:

1. The article's statement that calling Webb "conservative" reflects a "simplistic understanding of his policy positions"; and

2. a commenter's note that "No conservative could ever" raise the point about "how the average CEO is making 400 times what the average worker makes."

I think this, and Webb himself, illustrate how both sides can be simplistic. There is a rich tradition of populist conservatism, which TR prominently represents (no coincidence he popped up in the speech). It values (small) landowning (small) business ownership and the value of work over exaltation of the large, multi-national corporation. It some ways it is, I think, misguided, but the pendulum has swung so far to the corporate side in the mainstream conservative movement that it is high time for this strain to be heard.

I don't know that that can happen in the R party. I don't think it will fit comfortably in the D party either, because it comes with other cultural attitudes that will clash, and because the D solutions to the social problems are unlikely to satisfy a lot of the people Webb appeals to. (Not to mention that the D's are just as corporate a party as the R's).

Webb would have done well to note that, when the executive/employee income ratio was 20/1, our economy was no less free than it is today; there are solutions other than the ones that will naturally occur to most modern D's.

[Tom K]

*Tom, you're just wrong about Webb and your vision of the Democratic Party is on the narrow side. "Make room for the likes of Webb..." are you kiddin' me? He's a freaking star! Umm, they chose him to give the rebuttal on the first national night of their empowerment - hello?*

Yeah, Tom, and Bush's critics were crazy in saying the war was a mistake in mid-2003. Baghdad fell, Saddam was deposed, success! Look no further than the immediate term!

[Slappy]

And some Dems quote Lincoln and see him as a hero. So what. Does that make them any less Democrat? What does it matter that Webb likes Jackson?

"...the D's are just as corporate a party as the R's" Tell that to the minimum wage worker. Walmart's profits are directly related to the minimum wage.

"...when the executive/employee income ratio was 20/1, our economy was no less free than it is today" Nonsense. Deregulation and a blind eye to wall street have given us a very different economy that is far more "free" thanks to mainly the Republican party.

"...the pendulum has swung so far to the corporate side in the mainstream conservative movement that it is high time for this strain to be heard." Finally something I can agree with. Although it will be heard coming from the mouth of a Dem. It already has with Webb's speech. What Republican is saying such things today?

[Tom W.]

TK - huh? I don't get the analogy, but ok, so I'm reading the short-term - Webb as fast-rising Democrat with a pro-worker, progressive streak. How does that brand of populism - which, he clearly moderates as much as John Edwards does - pose problems for the national democratic party?

You can fit Jim Webb, Barak Obama, Hillary Clinton, Rahm Emanuel, Howard Dean, Chuck Schumer, and the radical San Francisco liberal Nancy Pelosi pretty neatly into a fairly tight ideological package - go just a little wider, but very clearly still "Democratic," and you can include Harold Ford and Jon Tester. Not sure where this massive ideology problem exists?

[Tom K]

The analogy is, sometimes conflict is apparent, if you understand the players, but not apparent if you don't. Things may even look great if you don't. As in each case I've analogized.

The problem is with seeing the Jim Webb one wants to see. One of us is guilty of this. (Probably we both are, but one of us to a significantly greater degree).

If Webb fits into the national D party, without that party making major changes to accomodate him, then he is not the man I believe him to be. Either because he doesn't believe what I thought he does, or because, contrary to my expectations, he is willing to tailor his core beliefs to appease the party. Time will tell. If he accepts a VP spot was Hillary or Edwards, he will lose the support of many people, like myself, who currently like him. He will, I suppose, gain the support of others; possibly many more.

Politics and people being what they are, it is reasonable to suppose that he will take the path of least resistance to greater power, which means moving to the D party line. James Webb being what he is (or what I believe him to be), there is reason to hope that he will not. He can function as an outlying D, joining them only where he has legitimate agreement. Although not the most obvious, that might ultimately be the best path to power for him if you believe, as I do, that a third party candidate will be elected president within the next 20 years.

[Tom K]

Slappy:

Well, I hadn't notice that Tom W linked to Webb's speech. So I went back in order to address your question, "where did Webb uphold Jackson as a Democratic hero?"

How about, "In the early days of our republic, President Andrew Jackson established an important principle of American-style democracy . . ." Citing a fellow generally credited with co-founding the D party, in the context of saying that he established an important principle of American-style democracy, seems a bit like citing him as a Democratic hero, whether "D" or "d."

[Slappy]

Tom K: Anybody who gets under your skin like Webb does has to be doing something right.

[Tom W.]

Ha yeah, Webb makes TK feel so much like....gasp...sputter.....a....a....a.....Democrat!

[Ralph]

TK come over to the light! Leave the dark side behind. The new moderate populist Democratic party!

[Tom K]

The Dems. can't do it. Some of their sensible portions, however, could be broken off and salvaged.

[Ralph]

Not sure what you mean Tom K. The Dems are the only chance we have. They are the grown-ups now. The GOP had 12 years to enact their agenda and what do they have to show for it? Not much. The only things they accomplished were under Bill Clinton's leadership.

During the Bush years they have ignored some of the most important problems facing our nation, and the world in order to wage an endless war for oil, contractors and cronies; they cut taxes for coporations and the super rich, they have gutted the EPA, invented K-Street project, outed CIA agent in order to hide the truth, allowed torture, they have contempt for the bill of rights, they played politics with terror alerts, demonized all opposition as weak on terror, they have contempt for science that does not fit their ideology, they pander to the extreme evangelicals, and they don't give a crap about the poor and middle class.

Sensible people of all political stripes are sick of them. Again, I appeal to you.. join us and together we will turn this country around.

[Tom K]

You're arguing for Pepsi over Coke, when I'm saying "no" to cola.

[Tom K]

*As to Ole Hickory, well yeah but the 19th century democratic party was pro-slavery for much of its existence; very hard to link its past to the party of FDR.*

The more I think about it, the more I feel this attitude symbolizes the problems that Webb and the D party will encounter.

This country, and the culture behind it, both have histories that stretch back a very long way (as you know), into a past where values and attitudes that are deeply offensive today were taken for granted by most, even among the progressives. If Andy J must be repudiated, as you imply, because his party was pro-slavery, then most of the country and culture that is valued by someone like Webb must be repudiated as well.

That contemporary D's find a Jackson reference jarring even on the subject of economic populism -- his defining issue -- shows the force of the rejectionist instinct.

That instinct has all kinds of ramifications that will cause conflict with those who value the traditions being rejected.

It seems that Jefferson alone is (more or less) given a pass by the progressives. Everyone else is judged not in the context of their own time, but by contemporary progressive standards. (Well, maybe Lincoln gets a pass too, but he greatly advanced the progressive cause, so I can understand that better).

The D party would get a lot farther in this country adopting Andy Jackson as its symbol than it would with Jesse Jackson. And that would still be true if you took a white progressive version of JJ, with all the charm. The fact is, Andy Jackson was the most important progressive in the US in the 19th C because, though he couldn't have foreseen (and might have been horrified by) it, he changed the basic dynamic of the country in ways that affect all US citizens today.

If the D party doesn't want to claim the tradition he represents, someone else should. Someone else will. And not, I suspect, the R party.

[b tween]

If the differences in principle are as narrow as Coke and Pepsi - which they aren't, then let's look apply that anlogy in the context of Webb, the Parties and Tom K.

A Republican, a Democrat and a Libertarian are crawling in the desert, having had nothing to drink in for 4 days while under a hot sun.

They come upon a table with a coke, a pepsi and a dry, waterless kool aid packet.

The Libertarian shuns both and promptly dies an ignominious death.

The Republican decides to wait for water so he can make and drink the Kool Aid; he dies waiting, but is heralded as a hero and is given a horse-drawn state funeral.

The Democrat drinks the Coke and Pepsi and lives on as an example of why it's best to drink what's there.

There will soon be long lines for cola, I'm sure of that.

[Tom K]

Under my analogy, we've been drinking nothing but cola for a long time. The folks are still lining up for it, unfortunately. The question is, will we ever stop?

[Nicole]

I applaud you, Mr. Watson, for you quick wit. Although I can't agree with all you push in your writings, I have to say, you are well spoken and very well thought out. I happened across your blog, and thought I would give it a try. I am glad I did, and look forward to reading more soon.