Why (oh why) can't the Democrats stay on message (or, perhaps more basically, have a message?)?

[The Stranger]

The Pelosi Disaster (sorry, can't stop referring to her that way (I know it is editorializing)) issues a statement saying that she is supporting the Debt Disaster "deal," but then adds that she "understands" why some will not support it. I tell you what, that is some fine leadership if I have ever sawed it.

This past weekend, I actually turned on C-Span. The Pelosi Disaster was saying something about the imminent Debt Disaster "deal." The funny thing is, she wandered back and forth so much, I couldn't tell what the fuck it was she was trying to say. She stumbled and bumbled and flustered and retreated from some statements, qualified some others, seemed confused about everything, wandered on to other subjects that were not relevant to the issues being debated. It is okay if she has no charisma and cannot speak eloquently, but if that is the case, at least fucking know what it is you want to say. She did not, it is clear. When she finished, she looked like she didn't know where she was. She had this look like she remembered she left the iron on, as I assume she had run out of time, and stepped down. The worst part is, I was left not knowing what the fuck the House leader of my party said or where she stood on anything, and this is when the country is gripped in the largest extortion attempt in history, and her party is purportedly opposing that extortion attempt. She is an utter disaster.

Some rank-and-file piece-of-shit Republican followed her, and he made her look like the crud on the bottom of a filthy shoe worn by someone who was a certified imbecile. He spoke directly. He spoke in complete sentences. He spoke in simple (but effective terms). He had a message. He told us what he was going to tell us. Then he told us. Then he told us what he told us. (Oh my God, I thought to myself, no wonder we are so fucked.) Then he stepped down, and everyone there silently reflected on what he had just presented. The worst part is, there are many rank-and-file piece-of-shit Republicans like him who do the same thing, and do it effectively. And we are left with the Pelosi disaster and, worse (if you can believe that), that lump of warm, smelly goo some call "Harry Reid." Yes, no wonder we are so fucked. Over and over and over again.

This morning, Emmanuel Cleaver was interviewed on NPR by Steven Innskeep. It was an unqualified fiasco. Cleaver sounded like he had just woken up and didn't know he was on the radio. Innskeep asked sharp, pointed questions about Cleaver's positions. Cleaver wandered around so badly, it was beyond embarrassing. This is the leader of the Congressional Black Caucus? He didn't have any talking points or positions. Unlike his party, the Republicans had set positions that they were all in agreement with and that they all set forth. So the media hits the American people with it over and over and over.

Even worse, Innskeep asked him whether he really was interested in cutting the deficit. This is a fucking softball. But no. Instead of a quick, perfunctory agreement and then returning to his message, Cleaver went on and on about how important it is to cut the deficit. He wandered so badly, I would swear Innskeep was laughing. Cleaver didn't realize he was afforded a short, critical and extremely valuable, free opportunity to address a national audience, and that he should be extremely prepared to get the message out in that short time frame.

He completely, absolutely fucked it up. There is no qualification on it. After he was finished stumbling around for minutes without any pending question, Innskeep put us and Cleaver out of our misery and thanked him for the "interview." Yes, no wonder we are so fucked. Over and over again.

Why (oh why) can't the Democratic party effectively deal with the media? Why why why why why?

[jaxx]

1. Oh woe is you.

:nopity: :nopity: :nopity:

[Enrique]

2. one day Pelosi told us we have to enter an "era of austerity"

literally the next day she spoke at a union event saying we can't balance the deficit entirely on "us", including herself I guess down here among the middle and lower classes.

[still_one]

3. Because the Democratic party is not a homogeneous party. Worse yet, there are some Democrats whose

ideology is based on republican principles, not Democratic ones

[The Stranger]

8. But is the Republican party really any more homogeneous?

Somehow they managed to keep their Presidential hopefuls from infighting with their leadership. Somehow they managed to use the Teabaggers to fuck the Democrats when their party is hopelessly split. Somehow they all manage to get their message across, as bad as it is.

[still_one]

12. I think for the basic ideology, no regulation, states rights, no taxes, no welfare, anti-abortion,

privitization of social security and Medicare, etc., the republicans are united.

Moderate to progressives would be united for regulation, civil rights, balanced tax system, pro-choice, and presevering Social Security and Medicare at all costs, etc.

However, many blue dog democrats do not subscribe to those standard Democratic principles.

[dawg]

4. Maybe she's conflicted.

Is she going to be the new scapegoat now?

[HughBeaumont]

5. Simplistic thought that can fit in sound bites . . . par example: "There you go again"

We always remember that. The rest of the debate, not so much.

Any imbecile can remember things like "tax cuts create jobs" or "must fight the terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here" or "can't strengthen the weak by weakening the strong" . . . all WHOPPER-sized lies, of course . . . but try and come up with a sound-bite length phrase to COUNTER them.

That's the beauty of a Frank Luntz/Karl Rove talking point - your audiences are clods that went mentally stagnant around about 24. Speak to them as such; if your position cannot fit on the first three lines of a cue card, it's a fail.

Faux "news" is the conduit for Cretin-speak. It's how they get to speak the same lies over and over again and it's why there's no rebuttal - long monologues beg for interruption, another thing the Grover Nerdquiffs of the world are awesome at.

While it's not our fault that we don't control the message, where the Democrats and progressives fail is that we don't speak sound bite.

[The Stranger]

9. Simplicity shouldn't always connote cretinness or stupidity.

Eloquence can be simple. It can be extraordinarily effective.

But it takes work, and it takes skill, and it takes organization.

And our party doesn't do it, for one reason or another.

I don't have to mention our President, and how effective he is at communicating, but he stands all alone.

[mmonk]

6. They have to wait for their assignments and official positions,

usually which occur at the last minute.

[Speck Tater]

7. Because the Dems have 14,237 different, mutually exclusive messages.

Every Dem has their own version what's important. Our party is a dogsled pulled in 100 different directions by 100 feral cats., unlike the Pubs who have well trained dogs all pulling in the same direction. But we don't want to be well trained dogs, do we?

[The Stranger]

11. Look, it is not that hard to come up with some basic things all agree on:

1. Kill the Bush tax cuts;

2. Kill the Bush tax cuts;

3. Kill the Bush tax cuts.

It really is that easy. Just focus on one thing and hammer and hammer and hammer. But here's more:

1. Payroll tax cut must continue;

2. Unemployment must be funded;

3. Supporting American families actually CREATES jobs via the multiplier effect, not cutting;

4. The stimulus worked.

Even if we don't have ANYTHING we agree on, we can always attack the Republicans.

1. The Republicans are split and have no leadership, even Boner cannot get a simple vote from his own party;

2. The Republicans ran up the deficit for a decade before the Democrats came in and were handed the broom;

3. The Republicans only serve the absolute richest, and corporate greed, not the regular family or small business owner (this is key, we have to include the small business owners and get them back from the Dark Side);

Finally, we can always claim the "American People" want what we want (and they do, but even if they didn't).

[Speck Tater]

13. Yes, we can agree, BUT...

when you talk to Dems you hear:

"Sure, that's important, but gay rights are MORE important."
"I agree, but the GM food issue is more important."
"Well sure, but ending the wars takes precedence over that."
"O.k., but you have to agree with me that abortion is a more critical issue right now."
"You're right, but animal rights are more important."
"Of course, but the environment is more important."
"Certainly, but sustainable energy is the really important issue."
"Without a doubt, but don't you think gun control is the more important issue?"
"I don't doubt it, but surely you can see that the separation of church and state is our most vital concern."
"Ya, that's kind of important, but first we have to get all this creationist crap out of our schools."
"Nah, the creationist crap is a diversion. Dominionism is the real issue at stake."
"We can let that stuff wait. We need to tackle this whole war on drugs debacle."
"Those are all good causes, but face it, without universal health care none of that stuff matters."

And that just scratches the surface.

[w4rma]

10. I remember before this fake crisis, all Democrats were lambasting the GOP over harming Medicare/SS.

Then OBAMA attacks Medicare and Social Security and we are right on the defensive. From that point on I decided he is a sneaky low down saboteur.