|
Edited on Sun Jun-19-05 10:26 PM by Sparkly
I don't eat red meat, but I love it in politics. I love it when Dean, Durbin, Reid, Conyers, Boxer, Kucinich et al dish it up. But if you're expecting it from Clark in his new role of foreign policy analyst at Faux, you'll be disappointed.
First, as I've said elsewhere, it's clear Hannity's got the technique down: Make a little speech tossing out eight different half-truths or all-out lies, then ask a loaded question. Clark can then either focus on ONE of those phoney memes and let the others stand, answer the loaded question and let all the phoney memes stand, or shift the focus to something Hannity wasn't expecting and didn't want to discuss. Guess which one you can expect? (So please don't complain "Yeah but he never refuted xyz!!")
Second, Clark is venturing where none like him have gone before, at least as far as I know. It takes a lot of guts to appear regularly on that network in a role that's not "Unappealing Democratic Whacko," which seems so often to be their casting. (I admit I haven't watched the channel much, but when I have, I've wondered aloud, "Who is THAT representing Democrats, where the hell did they get him, and could they have found anybody WORSE?") They set them up like punching-bag foils.
Third, put yourself in Clark's position. Ask yourself two things: 1.) What would you want to say to that audience in 30 seconds? and 2.) What would be HELPful to say to that audience in 30 seconds? If any of us were to say what we wanted, we'd be immediated rejected by that audience and/or dismissed and ridiculed by the "host." These people are practically brainwashed, polls show they've been egregiously misled, they are ignorant of basic facts, they've dug their heels in as supporters of the GOP for those reasons and their knee-jerk response to Democrats is emotionally equivalent to what ours is to Freepers.
Fourth, consider why General Clark took on this task, by considering the consistency of what he always says. He quotes another leader in saying, "Leadership is persuading other people to want to do what it is you want them to do." He says, "We need to reach out; we need to bring people together; we need to pull people in." He said and DID that in uniting people of different backgrounds in the army, he said and DID that in uniting people of different nations, and he says and can DO that in uniting people in America under Democratic principles.
Fifth, remember that we're not running against Bush anymore -- we're running against the rightwing, neocon, BushCo POLICIES that will remain in 2006, 2008, and beyond. When that simian figurehead leaves office, they'll still be there, their effects will still be there, and God knows their rhetoric will still be there. Contrary to last year's campaign, there's only so much mileage to be gained now in criticizing the Chimp to the people who voted for him. They don't want to hear that they were/are stupid. They want to feel smart about the next view they hold and the next decision they make. Even if we're only talking about 10% of them, it's enough to make the next elections hard to steal.
Listen to Clark on Faux. He won't lie, he won't betray our party, he won't betray his own beliefs, conscience, or worldview. To him, it's all about people -- from business to politics to foreign policy, it's about people. I believe he joined Faux to lead people toward the liberal Democratic point of view, and part of that is emphasizing policy, principles and patriotism even above partisanship.
Meanwhile, he is giving both sides ample transcripts and video to scrutinize and criticize; but in the long run, he's giving our 2006 and 2008 candidates a new chance, a new view, a new opening among the very voters we need to win over.
The man is brave, committed, and damn smart. In enemy territory, the strategy is different than on home turf, so we can't expect the red meat of campaign speeches. But watch him work! He's gone into the battle to take the next hill, and for that alone, I applaud him.
You go, General!!! :patriot:
|