Vermont Dems Continue on Impeachment Bandwagon, page 2

seattlelaw, I would like to say you gave a reasonable answer to my question.

Originally quoted by seattlelaw
(1) the dem's remain gun shy and are having trouble presenting a united front in response to the madness taking place. There's just so much corruption it's overwhelming for all concerned.

I partially agree with you here. Yes, the Dems are gun shy. However, I'm convinced that the problem they are having a united front is that they are being shut out by the media in terms of getting their message. And secondly, Karl Rove's engineering of propaganda has made it seem like the Democrats are scattered in their approach of presenting something credible in terms of a platform. Let's not kid ourselves. Everytime one Dem representative from government appears on T.V., their comments are simply cut short and then the pundits do a hatchet job on what they say. So, any strong statement by the Dems are going to be misconstrued as simply an "attack" on the POTUS instead of perhaps, a focus on policy.

Journalists, these days, are hatchetmen instead of doing their true jobs. They gain status on the media, whether in print or broadcast, on the way they can "spin" a situation instead of presenting the facts. Call it sensationalism if you want. But reporters have to clean their own house and institute a new policy in which to report the story in hand instead of relying on talking points from a political party. Since reporters are now pundits, they are much prone to include all sorts of bias in their reporting without following the guidelines of ethics. And because viewers (as well as readers) are powerless to stop them in their tracks, they can get away with murder in misrepresenting the facts as well as not honoring "equal time" to both sides of the story.

The Dems, because of this are truly screwed. We both have probably witnessed how the RNC's efforts filled a segment of the population with misinformation that is hard to dismiss even though facts have provided the contrary.

If the Dems truly try to highlight the "culture of corruption", who will actually believe them? It will seem like a tactic that simply places them in a terrible light. Added with the RNC talking points, the reporters (as pundits) will simply spin the information against Democrats and dismiss it as "liberal nonsense", imho. I know you said that you didn't watch a lot of the media, but the most simplest test is to see how many hours are devoted to "republican" news and pundits compared to "democratic" news and pundits.

Originally quoted by seattlelaw
(2) Even though they're not in the GOP, the neocon smear tactics can still unleash a painful blow to dem's. With midtem elections in a few months I think both parties are hunkering down to see what John Q. Public does. If the dem's take back the house, a meaningful opposition can begin to get traction. This would likely include impeachment hearings. If the GOP retains control I think things will continue to slide further away from most investigations of wrong doing, including impeachment.

This I truly agree with. The Dems, imho, are being way too cautious. They simply cannot buy into the hype that the "smear campaigns" will destroy them. The reason why I give credit to people like Barbara Lee (D-Ca), John Conyers (D-Mich.), Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.), Maxine Waters (D-Ca.), Cynthia McKinney(D-Ga.) and John Murtha (D-Pa.) is that they defy the democratic policy of "rolling over and playing dead". Dennis Kucinisch(D-Ohio) as well as Howard Dean (DNC Chairman) are also good because they stood up and spoke their minds against the policies of the neo-Conservatives in office. They took courageous stands at key times to display a sense of character and courage when their party and the other side of the aisle opposed their efforts.

They have to stop the infighting and start a concerted effort to contradict every neo-con smear with facts of the situation. Hire investigators. Constantly bring up impeachment along with other key issues that Americans care about during stump speeches. Make time to be interviewed on the Sunday morning shows as well as radio talk shows across the country (there are shows other than O'Reilly, Hannity, and of course Rush). They have to convince their constituents that they mean business instead of waiting to see how the public reacts.

I prefer the Dems to be reactive and very supportive of grassroots campaigns. And they have to convince people to believe in their core platform by presenting the plain facts about the economy, jobs, health care as well as happening in the government. They also have to find a way to quickly counter negative publicity by hiring someone that is ready to confront Mr. Rove's tactics instead of just letting him get away with murder.

I agree that they have to reach the public through alternative sources and local media in order to get the message of impeachment across. In the past, I would think that there would have been a bold attempt on television or radio to present a case for unseating the president. Now is the time instead of worrying about what the public thinks to make their case known through simple logic and persuasion in order to present a clear picture of why the situation is so dire.

If they wanted to, the Dems could present a case why Bush needs to go by continuously filtering the airwaves with the proof of the matter. Can they not present the illegalities of the case against Bush clearly through all the violations that have already been done? The more and more the public sees the situation, then the outrage will be there. Until then, there isn't enough outrage (except for the immigration protests that are happening across the country) to generate the support for impeachment.

It's time that the Dems used the Republican's logic against them.

[edit on 12-4-2006 by ceci2006]