Helen Thomas: When are the Democrats going to get their act together?

[Douglas Carpenter]

link:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/275029_thomas23.html

Friday, June 23, 2006

Democrats need a new script

By HELEN THOMAS
HEARST NEWSPAPERS


snip:"Are the Democrats going to be such easy prey again, neutralized by phony wedge issues and neglectful of the real issue, which is the administration's flagrant use of falsehoods to justify a war of choice?

It could happen again. The leaderless Democrats, speaking in a cacophony, are being outgunned by the conservatives and members of their own party representing the Democratic Leadership Council who are at heart "Republican lite." "

snip:"Polls show that the American people -- including many Republicans -- are beginning to turn against the war.

In addition to an endless war for no known U.S. objective, there are a host of other issues that Democrats should embrace to hit home to every American

They could shout from the rooftops against the chipping away at the Bill of Rights and expansion of presidential power."

snip:"And then there are the shameful alleged secret prisons abroad where prisoners may be subjected to torture under interrogation.


read full article:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/275029_thomas23.html


EDIT: COPYRIGHT. PLEASE POST ONLY 4 OR 5 PARAGRAPHS
FROM THE COPYRIGHTED NEWS SOURCE PER DU RULES.

[tavalon]

1. What a fine journalist!

We are lucky to have Helen Thomas on our side, even when she's spanking our collective butts.

[WePurrsevere]

2. Excellent points! Now if the Dem candidates would actually run with these

(not going to hold my breath however ::sigh:: )

[Douglas Carpenter]

3. yes that's the question isn't it?

[Peace Patriot]

4. Somebody clue her in, okay? Doesn't she KNOW that the Democratic leaders

will NEVER get their act together until they cop to their fear or collusion on privatized elections, run by two electronics corporations with very close ties to the Bush junta (Diebold and ES&S) using 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, with virtually no audit/recount controls?

This was the coup engineered by the two biggest crooks in Congress, Tom Delay and Bob Ney (abetted by Bilderberg 'Democrat' Christopher Dodd): the "Help America Vote for Bush Act" of 2002 (aka, HAVA, but really HAVBA), passed by the Anthrax Congress, and providing a $4 billion boondoggle with which to corrupt our entire election system in every state, and render the 2004 election NON-TRANSPARENT with illegal, private, secret vote counting under Bushite control. TRADE SECRET vote tabulation. No paper trail. No ban on partisan vendors. No ban on lavish lobbying and "revolving door" employment. Secret industry "testing" of the machines. Bullying regulators forcing the states to hastily purchase extremely insecure, extremely insider-hackable, crapass electronic voting systems that NOBODY understands except the private techs at Diebold and ES&S. Programming code so secret that not even our secretaries of state are permitted to review it.

And when one tried to--Calif Sec of State Kevin Shelley, in his lawsuit against Diebold (demanded their source code prior to the '04 election, decertified their touchscreens)--they 'swiftboated' him out of office on entirely bogus corruption charges, and replaced him with a Schwarzenegger Republican APPOINTEE, Bruce McPherson, who made the lawsuit go away, and has now illegally RE-certified the worst of Diebold's election theft machines, the touchscreens--prior to his own and Schwarzenegger's first real election this year.

Now, how did all this come about with no objection from the Democratic leadership? Are the Democrats insane? Why their SCREAMING SILENCE about BUSHITES COUNTING ALL THE VOTES WITH SECRET PROGRMMING CODE?

That's the heart of the matter. Right there. They all voted FOR it (with two surprising exceptions--Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer!). And have said NOT ONE WORD against it since. WHY? WHY? WHY? WHY? WHY?

------------------------------------------------

Throw Diebold, ES&S and all election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor' NOW! --if you really want your country back!

:think: :patriot: :argh: :patriot: :think:

[niceypoo]

5. I love that logic.....

"It's diebold's fault that the democrats are milqtoast"

[Peace Patriot]

7. Yup! 1. Diebold/ES&S "select" Democrats, too. 2. In primaries as well

as general elections. 3. All Democrats--good and bad--are now beholden to Diebold/ES&S and to the local election officials they have corrupted with lavish lobbying and the heady power of secret vote counting, and thus are beholden to the Bushite nod. 4. Diebold, until recently headed by Wally O'Dell, a Bush/Cheney campaign chair and major fundraiser, who promised in writing to "deliver Ohio's electoral votes to Bush/Cheney in 2004," and ES&S, initially funded by rightwing billionaire Howard Ahmanson, who also gave one million dollars to the extremist 'christian' Chalcedon Foundation, which touts the death penalty for homosexuals (among other things); Diebold & ES&S have an incestuous relationship--they are run by two brothers, Tod and Bob Urosevich.

These are the people who are now (as of '04) counting ALL of our votes under a veil of corporate secrecy. You don't think that affects Democrats?

[depakid]

10. The phenomena has been going on MUCH longer than

electronic voting- and it's cost the Dems 6 straight congressional elections. Since 1994 they've been timidly playing Republican lite- while on the legislative level, legitimizing and enabling far right policies.

They'd be losing with that "strategy" with or without Diebold, et al.

[kster]

14. Two "supposedly" competing parties, Dems and Repubs

and both parties don't seem to care that the vote counting is done in secret, WHOOOOOOOO BIG CONTEST! I can't wait to see the out come.

[agincourt]

25. Next election same old shit,

Repigs are "genuine", "Americans feel safe", "Democrats are headless", "ecomomy is good", "illegal immigration resonated with the voters", "Rove is a genius", "Things are looking up in Iraq", "Democrats are weak and disorganized", same fucking shit. A rigged election with Democratic candidates to play the dog's bitches. If the minority vote is suppressed and the hacked votes are added to the GOP totals we'll always have a Washington full of corporate, confederate pigs. What can we do? No one knows so blame the DLC. Time for the disenfranchised to unite.

[blondeatlast]

9. It wouldn't be a proper GD thread without a self-defeating reply

from that faction.

I used to take them seriously, but theri constant negative vibe has completely turned me off to the cause.

[YvonneCa]

6. Sent to Helen...

...just now.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Dear Helen,

I loved your article about the Democrats. They do need to get their act together publically, and the sooner the better, in my opinion. I do think that is starting to happen. On the outside chance that you missed any of the 'Take Back America Conference' speeches, I have added the link below. Watch Senator John Kerry's speech...all the way to the end. He is doing what you say, but the coverage is nil. Maybe you could help with that. :)

http://www.politicstv.com/blog/index.php?paged=3

Sincerely,

XXXXXXXXXXXX

P.S. I support your patriotism as a journalist 100%. Thank you for what you have been doing to restore our great country to it's true greatness.
:patriot:

[calimary]

11. Letters to her like this one are VERY good, and much appreciated.

Helen has said so, herself. After all, she gets far too much hate mail for these commentaries of hers. Far too much. A lot of it with death threats. Nice people on the other side, 'eh?

K&R

[unkachuck]

13. maybe....

....the current crop of corporate Dems go along because they get to keep their jobs if they play ball with the corporate establishment....

....or, maybe corporate Dems are stealing votes over here while corporate repugs are stealing votes over there....

....you're right, the Dems silence is deafening....

[blm]

8. DAY AFTER THE MEDIA STARTS REPORTING TRUTH and STOPS PROTECTING BUSH

Why don't you WRITE about that Helen, and stop excusing your reporter pals who have been shilling for BushInc since LONG BEFORE 9-11.

How many of the Dem counterattacks on BushInc went UNREPORTED?

[paulk]

12. bingo

[bobbolink]

23. Uhhh, she has..........

"Why don't you WRITE about that Helen, and stop excusing your reporter pals who have been shilling for BushInc since LONG BEFORE 9-11."

Maybe you've heard of her new book, WATCHDOGS OF DEMOCRACY ? Her words to her cohorts in journalism are just as strong, if not much more so. She cuts them no slack.

Maybe you would like to watch her on C-Span 2, BookTV, before *assuming* she hasn't taken her own profession to task. In no uncertain terms!

Helen is so much on our side that she is speaking up for what needs to be said, to all concerned.

[blm]

24. SHE DID NOT - she EXCUSED them as being unnerved by 9-11 and gave that

as the REASON why they were soft on Bush. BULLSHIT. They have been protecting Bush since he was running for office.

9-11 just provided them with the COVER to do it more BLATANTLY.

[bobbolink]

26. I watched: did *not* hear an "excuse"

You're entitled to your opinion, obviously.

However, it sounds to me like the objection you have is that she is prodding Dems. Some of us agree with her on that.

I doubt her journalism peers appreciated her comments any more than the DLC Dems did.

[blm]

27. I understand what she's saying, but she's pulling her punch ALOT on her

peers.

She could also be too close to recognize the corporate influence over their decisions. I doubt they share with each other how controlled and directed they are.

[bobbolink]

28. That's not how I read her at all...........

I was particularly struck, when she confronted *wa at his snooze fest, that she is quite girlish and giggly at times, and quite soft spoken.

So, again, you're entitled to your opinion, but my sense of her is that she is genteel and a quite proper person who doesn't get in peoples' faces to confront them. I'm willing to bet that what she said about her peers was just as stinging to them as some are taking her words about the Dems.

It's clear she wants the Dems to pull ahead, use whatever advantage is there to take a clear win. She's saying that as clearly as she can without being "partisan". What she said was clearly constructive criticism, and we can only hope that some Dems, in positions to make a difference, will take her words seriously.

She certainly voiced opinions about Dems that match people *I* know.

We definitely need more than a cheering squad at this point -- we need some clear directions.

[blm]

29. I don't doubt ger genteel nature - I have been a longtime reader of hers.

My point is that she KNOWS her peers have fallen down on the job, but she attributes it to 9-11 INSTEAD of the reality that they have been skewing the news for BushInc LONG before that.

She doesn't see it that way, fine, then she's probably too close to them to see it clearly.

[bobbolink]

30. Have you written to her of your concerns?

She's the only journalist I know who answers her email. Of course, I would prefer it be said to her in a courteous way, but it's your email.

From page 135 of her book, "Watchdogs Of Democracy?", the chapter "Lapdogs of the Press":

"For all the unhappy trends I have witnessed --conservative swings on television networks, dwindling newspaper circulation, the jailing of reporters and 'spin'--nothing is more troubling to me than the obsequious press during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. They lapped up everything the Pentagon and the White House could dish out -- no questions asked."

"Reporters and editors like to think of themselves as watchdogs for the public good. So do professional journalism organizations that set ethical guidelines and strict rules for membership. But in recent years, both individual reporters and their ever-growing corporate ownership have defaulted on that role. Ted Stannard, an academic and former UPI correspondent, put it this way: 'When watchdogs, bird dogs, and bulldogs morph into lapdogs, lazy dogs, or yellow dogs, the nation is in trouble.'"

I could quote more (only two paragraphs so far), but I certainly don't think, as you can see here, that she is "probably too close to them to see it clearly." I think she *obviously* sees it all too clearly, and is to be commended for continuuing to speak out against her own profession.

Your other point, that she is only commenting about the post-911 era, is, it seems to me, what she is focusing on at this point. I don't think she would disagree with you that the problem started before that. However, since it seems to bother you so much, I would really encourage you to write to her with your concern. My guess is that you will get a reasonable reply. After all, she *is* on "our side". (That is, the "side" of being concerned about our nation.)

I once wrote to her about something I thought was important that she didn't include in an article, and asked that she try to find an opportunity to write about it. This is the reply I got from her: "You're so right. I'll do my best. Thanks."

So, give it a try, and let us know what you hear back from her.

We're all in this together! And that also means shining a light on the the Dems, and their strategy.

[OzarkDem]

32. Maybe Dem leaders need to be more vocal about that problem

and Helen needs to be more vocal about it, too.

[fooj]

15. She is awesome. I love this woman!

:loveya:

[Douglas Carpenter]

18. she is wonderful

you know she has attended press conferences of every president since FDR and has been full-time at the White House for every president since JFK.

[iconoclastNYC]

16. I love how she calls out the DLC

Only an idiot would fail to see thru the DLC racket.

[Totally Committed]

22. She is a real hero of mine...

She tells it like it is and isn't afraid to speak truth to power... She has more courage and class than anyone in the Washington Press Corps!

I love that she called out the DLC!

TC

[Awsi Dooger]

17. We need a political version of Angelo Dundee

"You're blowin' it, kid. You're blowin' it." he said to Sugar Ray Leonard between rounds during the famous fight with Tommy Hearns in September '81.

Leonard changed from boxer to puncher and took out Hitman in 14.

Just stand up and define ourselves. For simplistic public consumption. I don't care what it is. Right now we're allowing a lightweight like Norah O'Donnell to kick our ass for not taking a clear stand. I post on other sites with balanced political forums and the "no Democratic message" theme is already front and center. Even posters I respect at those forums are using it. If we deny that and pretend an anti-GOP wave will be enough, plenty of split decisions in November, and we haven't exactly been winning a high percentage of those.

[ChipsAhoy]

19. How old is Helen?

Seems like she's been around forever! Go girl!!

[Catchawave]

20. Well....I just knew she needed more

"watch your backing" than $3,000 worth of roses, which I'm sure she appreciated !

Her gig on Colbert, priceless :hi:

[sandnsea]

21. Democrats *are* running on that

These kinds of articles didn't help in 2004 and they don't help now. She's great at skewering the Bushies, she really ought to stick to that.

[OzarkDem]

31. They didn't help in 2004 because we didn't push Dem leaders hard enough

We have to push them harder now to show leadership and teamwork and speak to the voters about real issues with real policy solutions.

Dems can do it and most of them are ready to, but the few at the top need to stop letting themselves be manipulated by the GOP and the corporate news media.