Cegelis vs. the Machine
By Cindy Sheehan, Progressive Democrats of America National Board Memberthe rest...
March 3, 2006--I am beginning to wonder what it is that such "Democrats" like Rahm Emanuel (Illinois), Chuck Schumer (NY), and Nancy Pelosi (CA) are protecting in Iraq.
What is it that they have at stake in keeping the occupation of Iraq going?
Their constituents in every case are solidly anti-war and anti-Bush. They all come from the bluest of states and/or districts.
Yet when faced with the chance to defend and promote antiwar candidates who agree with the majority of Americans that it's time to get out of Iraq this year, they go into overdrive to try to destroy their candidacies. Take the case of Christine Cegelis [candidate for Congress in Illinois' 6th District].
Going to be an interesting convention for Democrats.
25 comments:
Progressive Democrats of America - the folks who gave you George W. Bush - twice. Whodathunque?
What's the story Bill?
Like most Republicans do you consider Sheahan a crazed tool of the leftists, or is she a voice that should be taken seriously?
If you line up with most Republicans, then this isn't much of a story, is it? Or are mainline Republicans wrong?
Enlighten us Bill. Tell us if she matters.
Skeeter,
I am a life-long Democrat and I think that Ms Sheehan's elevator does not go to the top-floor.
Heard her speak - nothing there.
I think the movement she's joined matters a lot for Democrats.
I think the party is head for a crack up the likes of 1968.
The 6th district being a bit of a preview.
I liked Cegelis. I don't vote up there, but I like her. The doctrinaires - sounds like a 50's Vocal group - will only screw-up her future, like they do everything they touch. Some of those mopes can't even name their precinct captains but they are goung to reform government.
She's useless...had her 15 minutes of fame and is now making a joke of herself. It's a fitting sign that Demcrats like Hillary won't go near her.
I am with others here. I have nothing but empahthy for her situation. That said, as a Democrat (and not a conservative, DLCer, DINO, Republican Lite, or whatever other terms some of the hysterical wing of the party might call me - I'm fairly liberal on most issues), I find her to be TOXIC. Even if this helped Cegelis in the primary (mimially, if at all), it would not help her in the General. It would hurt.
Pat,
I regret that I agree with you.
I thank her for raising an hero for a son and I regret her loss, but I don't take much of what she has to say very seriously.
There are always loud-mouths on the fringes. The Republicans have people like Roskam, Phelps, and Stanek. At least on the fringe of the Democrats, we have people who have made a genuine sacrifice for our country.
Bill, you may be right. You are an Illinois Republican and you know all about horrible breakups. Think you all will win any statewide races this year?
SenorAnon,
Thanks for setting the tone here.
I think she has great impact, and for that reason her views should be commented on...
...but let's avoid commenting on her herself...
Skeeter,,,
The Illinois Republican party is poster child for political self destruction.
I remember 1968 well. It was my political coming of age year. It feels like the Democratic party is setting itself up for a repeat.
I have nothing actively to do with partisan politics by the way.
Bill
Bill,
I did mean Sheehan's politics and impact...not sure if your comment at me was sarcastic or not.
Anyhow, to further the point -- I think that Sheehan represents a very vocal, but ultimately small -by numbers and dollars- wing of the party.
As an example, witness the dollars that came in to Cegelis' campaign because of DFA's endorsement ($6,000 last I heard - certainly could be more), vs those to Duckworth after Kerry's appeal ($100k plus in a matter of hours - and he's the ULTIMATE company guy).
I am not saying the Democrats aren't in need of major surgery -- but the loud voices and guerrilla-style campaigning of the DFA-wing won't force radical changes. Smaller incremental ones? Only if they stay organized (a tough thing for liberals - seriously).
If they actually get some folks into office, their power will swell. Until then - loud voices, with important things to say, but without the big stick to enforce their points.
I call them 'toxic' because they make good copy and have media savvy, so they get covered. But to be linked to them is to be in direct opposition to middle-ground voters - the ones who decide elections (even when middle-grounders agree with them on principle, they will never identify with their radical politics).
And that is, in a nutshell, why I disagree about the party coming into some sort of dark night of the soul.
Bill,
If you are right about the Democractic Pary, it would be amazing.
In Illinois, the Democrats control everything.
Nationally, the Democrats came within a few points in Ohio of winning the oval office, and made a net gain nationally of state legislative seats.
I think that says the party is doing pretty well.
Moreover, the Republicans walked into a buzz saw with the port matter. That will cost them substantially on defense issues.
We saw with NOLA that Republicans could not manage the government in crisis, and the port thing just added to the idea that these people cannot be trusted with our defense.
At the same time, the lunatics on the anti-abortion issue are finally coming out of the closet. Wait until people see what Republicans will do on abortion when they finally have their say.
There is a reason that Mr. Bush is polling at an all time low.
If you have any evidence to counter this, please enlighten us.
Senior Anon,
Not sarcastic at all. I think her politics are toxic. But I empathize with her.
Duckworth and Sheehan both present the same issue of how to you respond to someone who's sacrificed and suffered a loss, and then --as is their right-- get involved in politics and say something toxic. I thought you did it well... and wanted you to be the standard for comments here.
Skeeter... Sheehan's article is the evidence for the crack up coming.
I think the Illinois Party a little out of step because it still is a much broader based party then the party is Nationally or in Washington.
I'm really interested in what happens in the 6th becasue I think it's kind of a proxy for things nationally... maybe Cegelis will be overwhelmed and that's the forecast for the future...
I don't know.
Not that I think Duckworth has said anything Toxic, but some over at SoapBlog Chicago may feel that way, so their stuck with the same dilemma in responding.
Bill,
Let me get this right:
Cindy Sheehan claiming we should get out of Iraq and only support candidates that will get us out of Iraq: Toxic. Will lead to downfall of party.
Rev. Phelps, selling ports, Jill Stanek, and the abortion clinic bombers: Not toxic.
Interesting perspective on extremism that you have there.
I was going to post something, but Skeeter's comments and fixation on Roskma got me laughing too hard. I'll try to compose myself and....I'm sorry, I can't stop laughing...
BB, sorry I mistook you. Appreciate the compliment.
Bill,
Are you really claiming that Tammy Duckworth is part of the "machine"?
Of course you know she isn't, and neither is Rahm.
Since we all know they are not, why do you continue to suggest that they are?
I guess when your party has no ideas, then you do what you have to do.
It is too bad. I remember when Illinois Republicans stood for something. It seems so long ago.
Du Page Mike:
What? John Kass said it?
Then it MUST be true.
Actually, Daley owes Rahm more than Rahm owes Daley.
Rahm was always the money guy on the elections, starting with Sen. Simon, including Mayor Daley, and most notably President Clinton.
Rahm is the "machine" only if every Democratic professional in Illinois is part of the "machine."
By the way, KASS IS A REPUBLICAN!
I don't think you knew that, Du Page.
By the way, how are your taxes out in Du Page? Too bad the Republicans are taxing the hell out of you.
Wow, if you really, really believe Rahm isnt' part of the machine then it's back to poly sci 101 for you skeeter.
I don't think Rahm belongs to The Machine.
I think he is A Machine.
Machine is dead. We have a Combine now instead.
It stretches accross both parties.
One reason I like Duckworth is she belonged to neither.
Let's see what she can do with the power of Rahm's machine.
Bill,
Thanks for the clarification.
Duckworth is Rahm's pawn, therefore, she's part of the combine.
cheers
Rahm may have used the machine and allied with it but may not be part of it per se. Rahm certainly benefited from HDO and Don Tomczak and the mob connected 36th ward but he is not part of them. They had to deliver because Daley told them to do it. Nobody really liked Rahm. Rahm is there because he raised a lot of money for Daley and more for Clinton. Money talks, and dumb precinct workers walk, and walked for jobs and some chump change for big money Rahm. Kind of sad. But even white ethnic Catholics are on the plantation now.
anon 12:07
even white ethnic Catholics are on the plantation now.
That's the funny thing.
We got rid of the Machine and the plantation just got bigger...
Even the Reformers and Republicans signed up as field hands.
It's really a bad model to describe our politics. I don't know how great it ever was for that matter.
I wish Cegelis wouldn't throw it at Rahm (How does Durbin escape?)
Post a Comment