Sunday News Shows

Here are the guests that will appear on the news shows tomorrow morning.  You're going to like the match-up on Meet the Press!:

"Meet the Press"  Guests: Democratic Leadership Council Chairman HaroldFord; Markos Moulitsas, founder of the Daily Kos Web site.

"This Week" Guests: Sen. Sam Brownback,R-Kan., and Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio; actor Leonardo DiCaprio.

"Face the Nation" Ch. 5, 8:30 a.m. Guests: Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

"CNN Late Edition" Cable, 8 a.m. Guests: Mahmud AliDurrani, Pakistani ambassador to U.S.; Reps. Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon,and Joe Sestak, D-Pa.; former Sen. Jim Talent, R-Mo., campaign adviserto Mitt Romney, and Rep. David Dreier, R-Glendora, campaign adviser toRudy Giuliani.

"Fox News Sunday" Ch. 2, 10 a.m. Guests: Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and his wife, Ann Romney.

The notables are in bold.

Let's get right to the big one: Meet the Press.  DLC Chairman Harold Ford will be on with Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas.  Many progressive activists, myself included, are very critical of the DLC for being Republican-light -- from trade deals such as NAFTA, to foreign policy, to ballooned defense spending, to a degree of social intolerance as well.  So look for Kos to possible hold the DLC Chairman's feet to the fire.  It's a battle between the old Democratic Party and the new Democratic Party.

But one progressive activist thinks it would be foolish for Kos and Ford to go at it, and wants the Democratic Party to be unified:

So we have Russert who wants to pit Kos against ford.  Notice thisisn't Dem/progressive against the GOP this is Dem against Dem.  Askyourselves why?  Personally I think Markos should be debating Rove,Mehlman or someone else from the GOP rather then Ford.

Russert is setting this up for fireworks, to create headlines like,"Democratic Party at Odds With Each Other."  Russert want sparks tofly.  Why? Maybe so Drudge will link to the MTP website or some shit.I'll let you come up with your own answers, but I personally think thatthis is a cheap shot at dividing the party when we are on the verge ofhistoric victory and unity.

Tomorrow morning we will watch it all go down.  Check your local listings for when it will air in your area.

Comments

[Jon]

I hope Markos rips Ford a new one. I'm sick and tired of the old guard. As far as the progressive activist's concerns about disunity I say he or she missing the real issue. Progressives and establishment Democrats are naturally diverging because establishment Dems want things to be business as usual and Progressives want new solutions to problems establishment Dems helped create. The most recent and vital example is warantless wiretapping.

Who cares about winning if the result is the same as republican victory. In my view a victory of that kind is much worse than any well fought loss. Remember how we felt in November 2006, what happened to that feeling? We don't have a real majority because Blue Dog Dems vote republican on vital issues. The mood of today could be no further from November 2006.The old must make way for the new.

[Chief Editor: Todd]

Jon, until 2006, I considered myself one of those DLC supporters. Oh man was I in la-la land. The DLC claims to elect candidates that are capable of winning. Well, in order to win, you need a spine and courage -- because voters respect those traits. The DLC has no courage at all. For some reason, they equate courage with far-left liberals.

In reality, you can be a moderate or conservative Democrats, but still have a spine...so I don't know what Harold Ford is talking about. Plus, his strategy didn't work -- the fact that HE was the only Democrat in a close Senate race to lose in 2006.

So who are conservative Democrats that have a spine? Try Jim Webb. Try the Mayor of Salt Lake City. Try John Murtha (although there are a few problems with him). Try Jon Tester. Try Claire McCaskill. These people got elected for a reason: voters respected them, and the candidates ran populist campaigns. It's about establishment vs populism, not moderate vs liberal. Ford has it alllll wrong.

[George]

Now that was probably one of the 5 the most interesting MTP I've ever seen.

Markos really turned the tables on Ford by repeatedly pointing out that it is the DLC themselves who are on the fringe of the party, not the millions of people in the netroots movement.

The difference between the 2 was obvious: The DLC wants to win elections. The Netroots movement wants to effect real change. The DLC, very much like the Republican Party, would gladly govern for 100 years with 51% of the vote, rather than investing in changing hearts and minds by educating real people.

In the end, the DLC will lose because the netroots movement is based on the long term desire for reform, while the power hungry DLC simply wants votes. And since there are a boatload of votes in netroots, they will have to make concessions to EARN those votes.

[Chief Editor: Todd]

You are right on the money, George. With these DLC types, it's all about winning elections, and not about facilitating change. Things can only get done when there is a people-powered movement. Look at some of the '08 campaigns now. So much of the money John Edwards receives comes from activists on the internet. Look at Obama -- about 300,000 donors! When politicians are indebted to people, that is real democracy! No, we won't agree with every decision being made on every level. But at least when we elect these populists, we know that their decisions will be made not because they owe something to DC lobbyists or Wall Street, but because its in the people's interest.

We've got a lot more work to do -- especially with all the garbage going on from the current administration. But in January with all the primaries coming up, we have a great opportunity to start a new chapter. We just cannot nominate an establishment candidate....otherwise we'll have 8 more years of the same damn thing, and continue feeding into the same damn problem.

[george]

This plays into what I once heard Noam Chomsky discuss - about how the USA is not a Democracy, but a Polyarchy. Meaning that we are a nation run by elites and every so often the public gathers to put their favorite elite in charge. No one knows why they vote for who they do - they give reasons like "he looks like a guy you could share a beer with" and no one really cares who wins because it's all the same anyway. (And to prove no one cares, look who is President and look how he got to be President - seriously - it's genuinely ridiculous)

Problem is, netroots breaks that trend and is attempting to create a real Democracy in which millions of educated voters have real influence. And the DLC cant deal with it because now they have to face the public every day. They cant win anymore by speaking in generalities or by not having real solutions on hard issues (no more god, guns and gays and tell everyone else to go away).

And you're right, Todd - we dont have to agree with everything a candidate does, but whatever it is the candidate must be genuine and must speak directly to who put them in power.