Dingell enrages Daily Kos (UPDATED: front-page noted at DKos)

God Bless John Dingell (4.00 / 2)

Michigan's auto workers owe Dingell a huge debt for 50 years of service.  It will be a sad day when he no longer is in Congress.

---

by: Fezzie @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 13:22:22 PM CDT

For them, (0.00 / 0)

  but as for the rest of us...

---

by: David Boyle @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 15:00:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Kill this bill... (4.00 / 2)

It is way past time for Detroit to stop this protectionist nonsense and improve standards on automobiles.

Enough is enough.
It is foolish on a competitive matter...and it is foolish simply because this is not Detroit's first whack at this apple...

Lest we forget, this is the second time the Big Three have gotten caught with their pants down.

Sorry, but Detroit had my sympathies the first time, when the Feds had to bail the Big Three out due to the energy crunch at the end of the 70s (when they allowed the Japanese to get a foot hold in our markets)...but, after having this happen to them the first time, they fecking went ahead and produced gas guzzlers (and lobbied to change the laws to get around environmental laws) and are now crying uncle!

Here's an idea...cut the CEO pays in half, sink that into R&D for creating new cars that will reduce the need on gas and still maintain the consumer demand for them.

As far as loss of jobs, Dingell has actually stopped Michigan from making the necessary transition to alternative economic growth...

Am I mad at the workers? Hell no...but please lets stop pretending that being green is what is causing the loss of jobs in the auto industry and focus on the actual causes.

This bill is just continuing to bail out the big corporations who are still going to close down these plants in Michigan and move to China...

Everyone here knows it, and so does Rep. Dingell...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 13:52:44 PM CDT

Kill bill: not just a movie (0.00 / 0)

  And as for Detroit's Big Three: "Insane Clown Posse--not just a band any more..."

---

by: David Boyle @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 15:04:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

At the risk of sounding ridiculous... (4.00 / 1)

...it is almost refreshing to see someone remembering who brought them to the dance.

When you are in the minority it is easy to remember who your friends are because the bad decisions can always be blamed on someone else. Agree with him or not, he's making decisions on his own terms and is willing to take the heat for them.

Granted, his dance started the year my mother was born, so maybe he should update the old dance card, but when looking at political realities, this really should be a surprise to no one.

You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you mad. - Aldous Huxley

---

by: Lenina Carton @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 15:24:12 PM CDT

No surprise maybe, (0.00 / 0)

  but maybe still not good either...

---

by: David Boyle @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 15:28:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not ridiculous (4.00 / 2)

probably the only redeeming factor in the whole mess.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 20:33:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Where'd the poll go? (0.00 / 0)

  I don't recall deleting it.

---

by: David Boyle @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 20:37:28 PM CDT

My bad (0.00 / 0)

  Poll is in another diary; this is what happens when there's lots of news/issues and you multiple-post...

---

by: David Boyle @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 20:39:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I had to tear that author a new one, though... (4.00 / 5)

As much as I hope this bill gets killed (The Big 3 does need to get their shit together and build more fuel-efficient vehicles), I had to tear the author of that diary apart for saying he hopes the Big 3 "roasts".

I work at a GM plant and didn't take too kindly for that.  Especially when the UAW played a large role in keeping our Governor in office and making our State much bluer than before.

Anyway, I wrote a diary on GM working to go super green with the Volt.  I won't link it, just go to the diary list.  I hope it goes into production soon.  I don't care how much it costs, I'd find a way to afford one!:)

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Tue Jun 05, 2007 at 22:12:51 PM CDT

"Roasting" goes a little far (4.00 / 1)

  Thanks for Volt thoughts too.

---

by: David Boyle @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 09:54:56 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

What's interesting (4.00 / 2)

is that the UAW rank-and-file supports stronger CAFE standards (sorry, no link, but I think you cited the same survey some time back).  Like you, I'm pretty close to the auto industry (grew up a factory brat, several friends who either are union members, or non-union engineering support).  There's not a man or woman among them who thinks a product line full of low-mpg vehicles is going to help them keep their jobs.  They're proud of the physical integrity of the cars they build, but they distrust the CEOs as much as we do.  Their biggest worry is that GM will go Chapter 11 as a way of weaseling out of their pension obligations.

Rather than leading with curses and threats to go primary on his ass, maybe someone should point this survey out to Rep. Dingell.  It might also help if UAW members got organized enough to point the same survey out to their union bosses.  When negotiating, you don't pull out the big guns until the carrot and stick have failed--it makes you look weak.

---

by: eartha651 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 13:25:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I never cited the poll... (4.00 / 1)

I went and looked for it and didn't find it.  Do you have a link?

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 05:12:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I did find this, though.... (4.00 / 1)

http://www.uaw.org/c...

The UAW says they opposed increased CAFE standards, but support tax breaks to help create hybrid vehicles in the US.  I think if a compromise can be worked out in which we have increased standards combined with those tax breaks, both sides (enviromentalists and The Big Three/UAW) would both be satisfied.

According to this article, the Senate increased the CAFE standards, and gave the car companies lots of money for improved batteries (which may explain the new contracts for creating batteries for The Volt):

http://www.autoblogg...

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 05:16:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dingell Ignores Credit For Supporting MSU Anti-DDT Scientist (4.00 / 1)

Maybe this is why Dingell ignored WKAR's request for his participation in a show including his standing up against agricultural/chemical lobbies http://www.michiganl...

One week he's an eco-hero and a couple weeks later he's a an eco-bum.


"We are the music-makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams" -Arthur O'Shaughnessy

---

by: Michael Motta @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 01:55:48 AM CDT

Wheel of change (0.00 / 0)

  Maybe Dingell can support some greener "wheels"...

---

by: David Boyle @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 09:55:48 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Others might call it... (4.00 / 1)

borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 12:08:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Pelosi torpedoes Dingell (0.00 / 0)

  As per today's DKos rec list diary, Pelosi Torpedos Boucher/Dingell Pro-Global Warming Bill...

---

by: David Boyle @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 12:38:25 PM CDT

That's good news (4.00 / 1)

I didn't think she'd let this one go through.  It's time for the autos to get with the times and do their part to help solve the climate crisis.  We'd be a lot further ahead now if GM hadn't killed the electric car.

---

by: SharonRB @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 20:24:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It could be (4.00 / 2)

that Dingell and Pelosi are playing good cop/bad cop.  Dingell introduces the bill, Pelosi kills it, and Dingell can tell his district, well, I tried but those evil Californians wanted to clean the smog out of LA.

Although I love the transparency that blogging has brought to politics, we as voters are still outsiders, and sometimes we don't have all the information we need to form an opinion on the process--although we have every right to oppose the product.  The analogy of politics and sausage-making comes to mind.

---

by: eartha651 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 13:57:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Clever cop game (0.00 / 0)

  Still, the bill was so noxious, I'm not sure anything could have excused it...

---

by: David Boyle @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:39:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'll give Dingell credit (4.00 / 1)

When it comes to protecting the bedrock of jobs (still) in this state - the Big 3 - they don't get better than Dingell. He knows his base well. Taylor, Dearborn, Downriver, Monroe.

As far as that poster on Kos, people wonder why working class individuals don't vote for as many democrats as before - that's a big reason why. Compare Dingell's victory percentage (even in 1994 when the district was less than 55% democrat) to other similar working class districts. There's a real anti-blue collar and anti-working/middle class culture out there among the elites - in both parties (amnesty). I'm not referring to environmental issues there, but the attitude - the "I hope they roast" crap since it's "cool" to hate American cars. 

"He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security" - Benjamin Franklin

---

by: Republican Michigander @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 14:53:59 PM CDT

Bad to roast (0.00 / 0)

  either jobs or the planet.

---

by: David Boyle @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 15:17:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

He edited the diary (4.00 / 1)

I gave him a rec.

Kos has a new one on the list that says Pelosi won't bring the bill to a vote.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 15:31:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ah fun (0.00 / 0)

  I may have noted above...

---

by: David Boyle @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 18:45:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The Bourgeois-ization of the Left (4.00 / 1)

I was reading today from one of my old books that I pick up now and then to reread while I'm in-between library books.

If, in the West, unions are a cog in the machinery of exploitation, why do wage-earners unionize? The reality is quite different: it is thanks to the unions, when they are skillfully run, that wage-earners receive a share of the surplus value. It would be hard to tell whether this share (wage increases, social security) corresponds to their own surplus labour or to that of other workers. Each now being both exploiter and exploited, the concept of exploitation no longer operates, and that of a revolt by the exploited against the mode of exploitation of labour loses all assignable meaning. Such are the ultimate consequences of the article written by Castoriadis in 1949.

(Modern French Philosophy, Vincent Descombes, pp. 133-34, trans. L. Scott-Fox and J.M. Harding, Cambridge University Press 1980)

The key part for our discussion here is "it would be hard to tell whether this share . . . corresponds to their own surplus labour or to that of other workers". In other words, non-union laborers may well be having their labor appropriated by unionized laborers. This is one reason why there might be an increasing rift within what passes as the American Left.

Especially as the percentage of unionized workers declines, those who remain unionized identify more and more with corporate agendas and less and less with the working class as a whole. Would-be Democrat voters turning (presumably) to the Republican party identify with the exploitation end insofar as they are part and parcel of it. Meanwhile, the rest of the proletariat and lumpenproletariat remain marginalized and are theoretically given some voice by those counterintuitively referred to as Left elites (the intelligentsia).

This monicker "elites" as applied to intellectuals of the Left may be disseminated by the Right as propaganda to alienate workers from Left intellectuals. It may also serve to perpetuate the lower socioeconomic strata of the Religious Right's seeing only "superstructure" elements of the Left (secular ethics) rather than the big economic picture of the infrastructure.

"We are the music-makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams" -Arthur O'Shaughnessy

---

by: Michael Motta @ Wed Jun 06, 2007 at 19:25:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The American dream (4.00 / 2)

is the problem.  One of the things our founding fathers tried to do away with was the British class system.  So the US became a place where theoretically anybody could get rich.  And that may be true even today; the problem is, not everyone can get rich at once.  This creates an undercurrent of intense class competition in what's supposed to be a classless society.  This repressed social Darwinism is why the rich think they deserve to be rich, the middle class thinks they deserve more and to stomp on anyone who tries to get there first, and the poor think they deserve to be poor because they didn't try hard enough. If you have the stomach for it, read some of the unmoderated comment sections in daily papers like the Free Press, News, Booth, Lansing State Journal, etc.  The primary theme is to hate anyone who is doing a little bit better than you, disguised as support of free enterprise.  The intelligentsia gets blamed for everything, but when you have your mind, material things don't matter as much.  The former Reagan voters (republican and former democrat, union and non-union) are the real problem--they've gotten theirs and are scared to death of losing it.

The old saw about Marxism being a utopian theory holds true here.  People seldom behave in their own best interest, let alone others.  In an economic meltdown (which is what we have beginning in the US), humans' already competitive nature will get amped due to the fear of not getting first to a pool of scarce resources.  It's extreme form of paranoia, similar to being in a war zone.  Rebuilding our economy so that there are more middle class jobs than people to fill them would go a long way toward calming people's fears so they stop lashing out at others.

---

by: eartha651 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 11:07:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dream is the problem? (4.00 / 1)

  Some perversions of it, maybe...

---

by: David Boyle @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 12:34:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Protestant Ethic, Social Darwinism, Malleable Human Beings (4.00 / 1)

Eartha,
I found it interesting that you bypassed the "Protestant work ethic", which may eventuate in the idea that the rich feel they deserve to be rich by virtue of their pre-election, and opted entirely for the "repressed social Darwinism" route. Max Weber argues, if I recall correctly, that Calvinist-based denominations, if not Protestantism as a whole, came to embrace capitalism insofar as the accumulation and reinvestment of wealth is a sign that one is predestined for heaven, and its absence yields quite another conclusion. To the Marxist though, this could be easily inverted to have predestination and its successful proliferation be the reflection of private property, liberalism (broadly understood) and capitalism. Of course Weber felt that the literal belief that wealth denoted pre-election had mostly faded yet its impact remained. I'm curious as to whether, for instance, the so-called "Dutch Reformed" on the west side of the state still actually believe in the doctrine of predestination or if that's considered merely ornamental nowadays. Perhaps I should ask the Disembodied Head of Dick DeVos (has to be one of the best blog names I've seen - it sounds like the title of a Surrealist painting).

I've not traditionally been a Marxist (though I continue to move Leftward the older I get - it's supposed to be the other way around isn't it?) but I will defend it against certain arguments. One of the issues raised against Marxism (as you raise) is that it is utopian because "that's not how people really are" or something to that effect. Oftimes this is spoken without the person's being self-conscious that it begs the question - namely, is human nature static? Marx claims that "human nature" is malleable and so isn't really natural at all; human nature is paradoxically, the ability to change human nature.

In order to address Marx on the grounds that he maintains a naive (utopian) understanding of humanity, it seems to me requires taking up a position that there is such thing as human nature the core of which is shielded from history. Thus Marxism would have it that human selfishness (properly executed or not) is more product of certain economic systems such as capitalism than it is cause. Of course the more religious would answer "yes, there is a static human nature" anyway, but there are plenty of non-religious folks I think who use a notion of human nature (consciously or otherwise) to attack Marx's alleged overestimation of it. It seems to me that social Darwinism would endorse a form of human nature's being dynamic too.

"We are the music-makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams" -Arthur O'Shaughnessy

---

by: Michael Motta @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 18:23:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You're right (4.00 / 1)

about humans making the slow crawl out of the primordial ooze and evolving, albeit slowly.  The European social democracies are a good example--after two world wars on their soil, they decided it was time to grow up (although their own immigration  situation has recently put their ideals to the test).  The U.S. is a young country, relatively speaking, and often behaves like a hormone-charged adolescent.

I think most liberals agree that you can't have social justice without economic justice; the question is how to get there.  Marx believed the workers would rise up and seize the tools of production.  I'd settle for expanding the New Deal social programs that the right is trying so hard to dismantle, and building the U.S. into a manufacturing economy again.  As someone else said here, anything else is just shuffling money around.

---

by: eartha651 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 20:16:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hormone-charged adolescent (It's irrelevant here but I liked it and needed a title) (4.00 / 1)

Eartha,

I don't believe that human nature is static, and I share that with Marx. However, IF Marx has a notion of inevitable progress (I can't recall if he departed from Hegel on that or not) then I don't buy that (and I'm too tired to research it now). Malleable is one thing, but inevitable and upward is quite another. In this regard I've always been more in the Nietzschean camp, although as I move Left I have to keep chipping away at Nietzsche while retaining some of the flavor at least. There are probably more on the Left who consider themselves Nietzscheans than on the Right nowadays anyway. This is because for some reason his notions of the relative, of perspectivism, and the role of language have made a much bigger splash than what to me is his exoteric Right Wing political philosophy (but it's not the religious Right nor the conformity or business type Right - I used to be in the Nietzschean Right camp but voted Left anyway, so "unsexy" is the American Right).

I'm glad you mention the FDR New Deal because that reminds me of one of my half-Eureka moments of studying political theory as a young student. When I heard in a lecture that a prominent Left-wing theory on FDR was that he was very conservative in that he likely saved capitalism and staved off a socialist revolution by instituting the New Deal, I was astounded! I'd never thought of it that way before but it made sense. And even if you don't agree with it, it still shows how much more complex politics can be than meets the eye. One of my other moments, maybe even more important than that in my development, was when I asked my professor (who often taught classic liberal theory such as Locke, Hobbes, Rousseau, Federalists, Antifederalists etc.) what he wrote his dissertation on,  he said "aesthetics" (with his Swedish accent). And being an American "kid", it had never dawned on me before to even think of art as political! I knew about censorship but I had no idea until starting then how big a role art plays in social structures, either reflectively or causally or a bit of both. I think Americans are encouraged to think of art as being basically ornament or decoration or "culture" without reference to what culture really means other than it's what proper and educated people are supposed to have.
Okay I'll shut up now!

"We are the music-makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams" -Arthur O'Shaughnessy

---

by: Michael Motta @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 02:14:47 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Marx? (4.00 / 1)

You may have to forgive my line of questioning, as I haven't spent too much time in a college classroom, but I always thought that Marxism=communism.  Is there something I'm missing here?

Not a fan of communism/socialism myself.  Too much power given to the Government.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 04:53:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

DJ, see my long droning lecture below. n/t (4.00 / 1)

---

by: eartha651 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 08:42:52 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm with you. (4.00 / 1)

DailyKos posters can't see past their noses.  Anything to do with Michigan, manufacturing, and jobs automatically turns into US autos suck, let them die, I once owned a 1966 Chrysler that (fill in the blank).  As if the only manufacturing that has died in this country is cars.  The US doesn't make anything anymore.

BobOak is over there posting against H-1B visas, and they, of course, are calling him a bigot and troll rating him.  With exceptions, Kosters can be a pretty self-absorbed lot. The world begins and ends with California, didn't you know that.

---

by: dkmich @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 07:23:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Daily Kos dummies (0.00 / 0)

  Believing that global warming nonsense, they should be ashamed of theyselves...

---

by: David Boyle @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 10:22:22 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Don't be snide. (4.00 / 1)

Nobody is promoting global warming, and you know it.  The ignorance and arrogance of some of the posters at dkos is pretty monotonous.  They think the world begins and ends with them.

---

by: dkmich @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 23:00:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Kos has changed (4.00 / 2)

since I joined in 2003.  After Steve Gilliard died last weekend, I went back to the Kos legacy site (www.dailykos.net) and read some of the early postings that Steve wrote and moderated discussion on.  The level of discourse among commenters was brainy as hell, and three-paragraph comments were the norm, not the exception.  Now I just skip past any comment shorter than three lines, because odds are excellent it's just a lot of empty rah-rah.

I'm not saying that blogging is dead, but I count myself among one of those intellectual elites that everybody's bitching about.  I hate groupthink, and I don't think everybody's a genius just because they can register a user name.  dk and dj are right--it's one thing to hold the auto industry to higher standards (and believe me, they'll be dragged kicking and screaming into it); it's another thing to pile on with a lot of insults and generalizations because it's cool and anarchistic to hate Detroit.  Or look at the bozo from California this morning who was bashing Boucher for supporting this bill--he actually referred to Boucher's district (which includes Virginia Tech, for chrise sake) as a "backwater in Appalachia."  Yeah, way to get working people to support you.  What DO you suggest we do for a living--sell insurance to each other?  It's easy to hate on this and that, but in the end, somebody still has to wear the suit, put on their social skills, and sit at the negotiating table.

OK, rant over, I'll go back to my latte and my Proust now.

---

by: eartha651 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 10:48:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good rant! (4.00 / 2)

In regard to the decline in dialogue at Kos, it's commonplace.  Same thing has happened at Democratic Underground.  Another thing I find everywhere I go is a sort of Jr. High mentality of popularity contest type stuff and cliques etc.  Additionally, at DU for instance, there are some mighty snarky posters who make lots of nasty comments on things they often know nothing about and some actually "admire" this stuff.  It's glaringly obvious there is a serious lack of social skills so they tend to try to dominate forums instead. 

Thankfully there is still lots and lots of great stuff getting posted on the tubes so, like you, I try to just skip over the crap.

Julie

To prepare for when your life flashes before your eyes, make sure it's fun to watch.

---

by: JNelson @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 11:29:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, we're glad you're here and participating... (4.00 / 2)

I've never been able to get into Kos, probably because I stayed out of contributing much to group blogs until last year.  And, because like so many other places, the stuff I read there is so damned predictable, I have a hard time developing a running interest in visiting the place a few times a day.

I don't want to harsh Kos too badly, because I think it has its place, but it's more about activism and party building than it is about serious discussion.  But,I'm no Democrat and I'm mostly a liberal through guilt by association and elimination (if you aren't ratshit insane, you can't be a conservative these days), and I'd much rather spend an afternoon reading Roy Edroso or James Walcott (or, hell, Gavin at Sadly, No) than the party line.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 12:26:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Kos saved my sanity (4.00 / 2)

in early 2003 when it seemed like the whole country thought invading Iraq was a good idea.  And the rise of the site paralleled Howard Dean's rise as a candidate.  I still think Dean would have made a great president (great as in FDR great), and even though the campaign imploded in Iowa, he did more than anyone else in the 21st century to change the political landscape of this country.

Bigger ain't necessarily better, but DailyKos as it exists now helps hold the left and middle together against the right, which is good.  And with so many people participating, they don't miss much in the way of news.  The diarists' work on the pet food scandal was invaluable for me and the health of my household fascist dictators (cats).

But there's so much chaff that nowadays I mostly scan the headlines and let it go at that.  I want to see our influence here at the state level grow so it's on par with the influence that Kossacks have built in Washington and in the press.

---

by: eartha651 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 13:00:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I still love DKos, despite it's flaws... (4.00 / 3)

The biggest problem with them is that it's inevitable that in a large political blog, politics is going to start becoming the problem.  I don't mean liberal politics, I mean the race to get the most mojo, getting your name out there just so you can get your diary recommended, and the pain in the ass celebrity status that comes with it all.  Just like it real politics, it's coming down to who you know and who knows you.  Jerome a Paris could write a whole diary about what color his shit was when he took a dump this morning, and it would still get recommended.  But the people who post occassionally and write very intelligent posts get flushed down the drain because they have no name recognition (believe me, everytime I bring this up at Dkos I get a lot of mojo for it-from people whose names I don't even recognize).

I also don't like that environmentalism and the AG scandal seem to be getting all the attention, when there are other bread and butter issues we need to be addressing.  I write about unions all the time, only to see the diaries being flushed down the toilet.  Hell, I was the only person on there who even bothered to write about Worker Memorial Day!

Anyway, despite all that, I still love 'em and will take the news from them over CNN, MSNBC, and FNC any day of the week.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 14:37:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Classy working class (4.00 / 1)

  Thanks for bringing up union issues on the blogs!!

---

by: David Boyle @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:37:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I was right... (4.00 / 1)

Jerome wrote a meta diary and it made the list.  It ain't about the color of his shit, but damn near close.

http://www.dailykos....

Fucking bullshit.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 23:27:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Popular kids, the geeks, the band kids... (4.00 / 2)

Yeah, very like a high school. 

---

by: dkmich @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 09:59:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

DU did the same for me in 2004 (4.00 / 1)

It was my first foray into participating on the 'nets when I found it right after the election.  Saved my sanity and inspired me to get active.  It's changed a lot since then, but I still love it and have made many friends -- both in real life and virtually.  It's the first place I go when I want to find information about a breaking story.

I like the format much better than DKos.  I post a little at DK, but mostly lurk.  Same thing on FDL.  I read a lot, but don't post much.  I'm so impressed with the intelligence and knowledge of the front page writers there (including our own emptywheel).

---

by: SharonRB @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:03:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

dkos has many positive points... (4.00 / 1)

The software is incredible, and some of the posters are really good.  But I agree it is like a huge HS, and I really have a hard time with the sanctimony and the troll hunters. I, too, came to dkos with Howard Dean.  Howard would be a great President, and he would have been if the Democrats hadn't of taken him down.  Lately, I feel as if I'm in a mega church of sorts when I'm at dkos.  I "sense" manipulation.  Well, I am an atheist whose politics I would describe as eclectic independent; and I don't cotton to herd worship of the Democratic Party.

---

by: dkmich @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 23:09:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Agreed... (4.00 / 1)

But, the amount of time I'll spend on a site is the inverse of how much time I have to spend finding a writer I can connect with.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:37:00 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Elite Eartha... (4.00 / 1)

  :D

---

by: David Boyle @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 12:32:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Repeating cycle (4.00 / 1)

Your comment about the quality of the postings heading down reminded me of my opinion of the "chat" areas for online services.  In the late 1980s/early 1990s, the folks on Q-Link, GEnie, or America Online were fairly civilized and there for what I believe are good purposes - meeting others and learning from them.  Somewhere in the mid-1990s, the quality of dialogue and intentions of folks online fell apart.

Blogs sometimes offer a good quality of dialog, but there are some folks who can't resist personally attacking others rather than criticizing and questioning just the ideas.  I run into this on San Francisco's http://www.SFist.com where they give "progressive" a whole new meaning compared to what I consider it to mean from my Michigan-raised background.

With gasoline selling for around $3.55 a gallon here in San Francisco, I suspect that market forces will influence the Big 3 to get their fuel efficiency crap together more than fuel standards.  I don't drive my car hardly - just under 2,000 miles over the past year - because I use my own two legs for transport primarily and the public transit system in the City secondarily.  However, if I did use my car more often and was looking to buy a new one, I have no doubt that I'd buy a Toyota Prius even though my dad (retired blue collar GM worker) would want to slap me silly.  I'm looking forward to seeing the GM Volt!

---

by: jimwhitaker @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 16:09:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Shortsighted (4.00 / 2)

He's done great protecting jobs during the past 50 years... if you look at it the whole 50 years.  Look at the past 5-10 years and Dingell's record for protecting Michigan manufacturing jobs ain't so hot.

By not realizing that the auto industry needed to change and by instead being a powerful instrument in the service of the car companies in opposing regulation, Dingell's efforts have led to the American companies losing industry shares and Michigan auto workers losing jobs to outsourcing.  It's typical "Next-Quarter's-Profits Uber Alles" thinking, instead of trying to protect jobs long term.

It's not a question of hating American cars.  It's a question of hating what the companies are doing to themselves and to the workers who rely on their jobs at the car companies and their suppliers.  Millions of dollars could have spent on upgrading gas mileage but instead they went to pay for lawyers and lobbyists to fight CAFE and emissions standards.

The loss of the auto companies' market share is killing Michigan right now.  That's what I hate.

---

by: gsbadj @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:24:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Long-term considerations (0.00 / 0)

  Very important to note. Thanks.

---

by: David Boyle @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:36:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I hope some folks aren't suffering from (4.00 / 1)

blog envy.

Kos is a free community representing a broad spectrum of ideas and beliefs (kinda like the Democratic Party), so there are going to be people who disagree and find certain things more objectionable than others.

My advice? Deal with it.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 11:27:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

::sigh:: this debate again... (4.00 / 2)

A dozen states, including Massachusetts, would be blocked from imposing new requirements on automakers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under a draft energy bill being prepared for a vote later this month.

If that's true, that is ridiculous, and completely unacceptable coming from a Democrat.

Now, the foundering Big Three (may they roast for their bloated incompetence as far as I'm concerned)

I totally disagree with that, David.  It's possible to want better fuel economy standards and not want the Big Three to "roast."

Check out my mediocre blog.

---

by: nirmal @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 13:45:40 PM CDT

formatting (4.00 / 1)

sorry about the screwy formatting... i meant to end blockquote after the "a dozen states" line.

Check out my mediocre blog.

---

by: nirmal @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 13:52:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Indeed (0.00 / 0)

  I think Lighthouse Keeper removed it, maybe with some urging from djtyg...

---

by: David Boyle @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:35:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Michigan and limousine liberals (0.00 / 0)

I read the diary and comments at kos yesterday during dkmich arguments with the , as a famous righty would call them, limousine liberals from the east and west coast.

The progressive populist from the midwest like us aren't getting any sympathy across the nation.  Michigan is being strip mined of assets and manufacturing and no-one outside the midwest cares except our congressional delegation.  Michigan is being assaulted by trade policy.  The trend in the US is to move manufacturing south to right to work states, to Mexico, China or any other low wage haven.

Gaylord, Mi has lost over 500 jobs in 16 months.  Thats a town of 3600 people.  The newest closure pays on average just over $10 per hour, yet their moving production to China.

Michigan is like the crazy uncle living in the basement.  They know its there, but no-one really wants to deal with Michigans troubles.  We're rust belt, the big three, their not part of the new economy.  While California has silicon valley, the east coast has wall street, we in the middle are expendable.

Another thing that drives the east and west coasters nuts is Michigan senatorial and house members have loads of seniority and are willing to weld power.  The easties and westies don't like that.  They don't have the amount of senior leadership we have and I'm sure thats a raw point. Dingel was around when Adam and Eve were alive, ha, ha. We have Dingel, Sander Levin, Carl Levin, Stupak, Conyers, Kilpatrick, etc.  Michigan has power if only they weld it.

I say Michigan looks out for Michigans best interest.  I believes Dindels bill was a starting point.  Things in congress never end up like their proposed.

---

by: northof55 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:25:15 PM CDT

How about American interests? (0.00 / 0)

  You know, that "U.S.A." we're all part of?

---

by: David Boyle @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:29:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Everything you listed (4.00 / 1)

had nothing to do with environmental standards.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:48:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

hmmm (4.00 / 1)

I say Michigan looks out for Michigans best interest.  I believes Dindels bill was a starting point.  Things in congress never end up like their proposed.

I was reading and agreeing along until the last line here.

I don't really understand this false dichotomy.  You can save the auto industry and stop climate change.  One doesn't have to come at the expense of the other.

Check out my mediocre blog.

---

by: nirmal @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 15:59:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I know perfectly well that you don't mean that (4.00 / 1)

the environment is not important, and I am sure that wasn't Dingel's point either.  It is just nice to have one of MI electeds do anything to try to support MI or its trade impacted workers.  This is NOT about autos, it is about trade and manufacturing. 

  Here, check out this link.

---

by: dkmich @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 23:30:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Is he actually helping? (4.00 / 1)

By coddling the Big Three CEO and stock-holders so they can continue to get every drop of profit out of these companies before they move them to Mexico (or China)?

Do you really believe that there is anything to be gained in protectionism when every major automaker not found in Michigan is moving to greater fuel efficiency?

And as was stated elsewhere...How can American companies meet the much higher standards in other countries but fight tooth and nail to not just keep, but undermine environmental regulations.

Make no mistake, Dingell was acting in the best interests of someone, but it wasn't employees...it was the corporations that funnel thousands of dollars in PAC money to him and other politicians so they can get an SUV classified as a car...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 10:34:57 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Unfortunately, (4.00 / 1)

you are probably right. 

---

by: dkmich @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 15:14:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well hmmm (4.00 / 4)

Nirm,

As I was trying to say, Dingels bill (sorry for the typos) was likely a starting point.  Dingel is old school and you must understand he made his name by being the big threes best friend as has already been said.  Do I agree with him trying to pre-empt California standards? No.  In fact Michigan should be pushing for higher standards. The big three should be leading. Cleaner cars. Ballist water standards in the great lakes, no withdrawal of Great lakes water.  As far as Michigan itself goes, MDEQ standards are high.  I work in local government and I'm telling you, nothing is easy. The problem is the state cuts and lack of enforcement.

Michigan and the Midwest are way behind in alternative energy, but much the reason is the state itself.  All of the Engler years and state senate and house republican rule has put Michigan way behind the curve.  On the DLEG site Michigan has had posted for years the best places to put wind mills, yet only today did Wolverine Energy, a coop, announced the wind farm in the thumb.  The two wind mills in Mackinaw City have had complaints by boaters who run through the straits that call them an eyesore.

Michigans legislature and the big three can take a lot of  blame, especially the legislature.  I am though a big believer in manufacturing.  An economy without manufacturing creates no value added and just passes money around.  The printing press is a service economies only friend.

Anyway, to many things to say, but, that my opinion and I'm sticking with it.

---

by: northof55 @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 16:28:02 PM CDT

thank you for clarifying (n/t) (4.00 / 1)

Check out my mediocre blog.

---

by: nirmal @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 00:06:16 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Higher CAFE standards in Michigan isn't likely to pass... (4.00 / 1)

Both sides know it's not wise to piss off The Big 3 in their homestate.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 04:56:13 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Forgot to add.... (4.00 / 1)

Because Michigan isn't going to increase its CAFE standards, we're going to have to wait for the other States (like California) to do it.  If even 6 states were to increase their standards, it would mean that The Big 3 will have to create cars for all of America that will conform to the standards in those states.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 04:58:24 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

An Interesting Profile of Dingell in Time Magazine (4.00 / 1)

I thought this profile of Dingell in the MSM might add an interesting perspective to this discusion.  Although I do not always agree with the Chairman -- Clean Air and Guns come to mind -- when you consider his entire 50 year as a stand up labor/liberal, I for one am a great admirer.

Ironnically, in this article Time speculates that he may do more to battle global warming than any other elected official.

An Auto Insider Takes on Climate Change
Thursday, May. 31, 2007 By DAVID VON DREHLE

There are millions of reasons to think Congress won't do much about global warming, all stockpiled in the lobbying budgets of the U.S.'s mightiest interest groups--automakers and other manufacturers, environmentalists, labor unions, farmers, oil companies, coal companies, utilities, the military, antitaxers and so on. A Washington axiom holds that it's always easier to do nothing than to do something. By that standard, tackling climate change, which would affect every industry and every private life, looks almost impossible.

On the other hand, there's John Dingell. Michigan's eternal Congressman, defender of Detroit's carbon-spewing gas hogs, would seem an unlikely cause for optimism. After all, his wife Deborah is a General Motors Foundation trustee, leading his critics to assert that Dingell is literally in bed with the auto industry.

But just as it took anticommunist Richard Nixon to open the door to China, and hip-hop mogul Russell Simmons to denounce misogyny in rap, so Dingell, Democrat from Dearborn and friend of factories, may be the insider able to drive change. At 80, restored to his wide-ranging dominion over the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, "John Dingell is one of the few people with the capacity to manage complex pieces of legislation where there are high stakes," says former House colleague Philip Sharp

Click For Link

---

by: Jrjr @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 17:05:43 PM CDT

What are they smoking? (4.00 / 1)

U.S.'s mightiest interest groups--automakers and other manufacturers

  This group is about as influential as me.  If you want influence, try big oil, big ag, big pharma, and the war industry.

---

by: dkmich @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 23:35:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

what uses oil? (4.00 / 1)

Are cars made of plastic and run on oil products?

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 10:36:34 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

we are a special interest , but NOT mighty. n/t (4.00 / 1)

---

by: dkmich @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 08:36:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dingell goes to china? (4.00 / 3)

It may be that, as Time says, John Dingell offering up any improvement on CAFE standards is a breakthrough.  Dingell is a truly shrewed dude, and as a former congressional staffer I can tell you he's truly feared and respected.  But let's not lose sight of the fact that in the end one could effectively argue that the Detroit auto industry's slide is directly tied to the U.S. industry's failure to keep pace with  the more fuel-efficient offshore fleet.  And that failure was enabled by a Michigan Congressional delegation that was in lockstep with the UAW and the industry on blocking improvements on fuel efficiency standards. When it comes to climate change, there's no room for error, and the splitting the difference incrementalism of your average congressional back-scratching deal. If Dingell's recent bill were to be enacted, and California's ability to legislate tougher emissions standards removed, it would not be a victory for the planet and its inhabitants, including Michigan auto workers. 

---

by: LiberalBubba @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 19:27:26 PM CDT

Greetings Michiganders (4.00 / 4)

I got tipped that you guys linked to the diary and I wanted to drop by and say Hi to anyone who is still here.

I had some interesting responses (and arguments) with auto workers and union members from Michigan. What was good about the diary was the chance it gave me to refine my thinking and increase awareness that the horrid legislation pushed forward by Dingell/Boucher was divisive. It was the perfect instrument to divide Californian liberals from Michiganders. There is also, deep in the comments, a lot of VERY interesting information about alternative fuels, Ethanol policy, and divers related topics in the energy and climate fields.

In one update, I apologized for a remark I made in the original diary about "may the Big 3 roast in Hell as far as I'm concerned" or similar words to that effect. In retrospect, that was intemperate and unnecessary. And divisive. My bad.

Things like that are always a learning experience for me. When I make a mistake and someone calls me on it, if I determine it really was one I'll own up to it. I'm not into flame wars. I'm more into making friends and building networks.

Thanks for the props and the further run-time on this issue. Boucher has pretty much said he's not giving up, but I don't think there's a lot he can do now besides jaw-bone a few people.

---

by: The Lighthouse Keeper @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 20:32:13 PM CDT

Welcome to ML. (4.00 / 2)

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Thu Jun 07, 2007 at 23:41:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

65 comments! (4.00 / 2)

I do believe that is a new Michlib record. Nice work, everyone.

"HAZEN S. PINGREE...He was the first to warn the people of the great danger threatened by powerful private corporations, and the first to awake to the great inequalities in taxation and to initiate steps for reforms. THE IDOL OF THE PEOPLE"

---

by: Hazen Pingree @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 06:45:19 AM CDT

Marxism put simply (4.00 / 2)

(or at least I'll try):  Marx and Engels' Communist Manifesto (1848) was the first time in history that anyone was brave enough to say that industrial capitalism was exacting a huge human toll on many, while making a privileged few very rich.  And it was bad back then--realize that Old Europe had been an agricultural economy for centuries, with most of the land land owned by the very rich and the peasants eking out a living one step short of starvation.  When factories like the cotton and textile mills appeared on the scene, powered by coal-fired steam engines belching black smoke into the air, whole families left the farm and went to work, only to find that factory life was worse but their old way of life was gone and they couldn't go home.  Sixteen hour days, child labor, and frequent mangling in the machines were the norm.  The environment went to shit.  It was an enormous social change, one that makes our current transition from an industrial to a tech economy look like Sunday brunch.

Marx felt bad for these first blue-collar workers and decided that the only way to help them was to let government run the factories and distribute the wealth equally.  That's all that communism is--I say this because the right likes to use it as a bogeyman word to imply fascist social control, without knowing what it really means.  Collectivism--forcing people to work on huge farms and live in bunkhouses--came later in China and Russia's social experiments.  However, Marx did advocate the end of private property.  You can find remains of this theory if you read Ken Kesey's The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, which is the best book about the hippies, period.

Nowadays in academia, Marx is studied for his socialism, not his communism.  He was a crackpot, like many other geniuses. Academic people are free to throw out the flaws in Marx's theories and keep the good part:  how can society best function considering that free-market capitalism always concentrates wealth in the hands of a very few people who did nothing to produce it except put up the money?  How do we get people to share with those less fortunate--do we appeal to their consciences, or do we force them, or something in between?  I think these questions are relevant to the rift between Detroit and the coasts being discussed on this thread. 

---

by: eartha651 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 08:43:47 AM CDT

Thanks for clearing that up:). (4.00 / 1)

I still don't advocate for the elimination of private property.  I believe that putting that much power in the hands of the Government would destroy our democracy.

I do believe that for a Democracy to thrive in today's world, capitalism has to be regulated, though.  Many argue that the founding fathers didn't intend for that, but our founding fathers also didn't have fortune 500 companies, and our Constitution was written long before the industrial revolution reached the United States.  As a result the market has to have some regulation to keep the system of checks and balances intact.  Otherwise political power is concentrated into the hands of a few CEOs.

Anyway, just my two cents.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 11:09:31 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

A couple of items on my hit list (4.00 / 1)

(1) Corporate personhood is not in the Constitution, and I doubt that our founding fathers could have conceived of such a thing.  Talk about corporate welfare.  Congress created it, and Congess can take it away.

(2) Stuff that wears out that you can't buy replacement parts for and have to throw in the trash.  Part of the problem is cheap Chinese goods, but I'd also like to see some kind of legislation to force companies to work from common templates and commit to keeping replacement parts in stock.  I have appliances that are twenty years old that I can still get parts for, while anything I've bought in the past five years has to go out to the curb.  Bring on the command-and-control social engineering on this one, and make Michigan the center of it.  After all, we still have Whirlpool, which makes the best kitchen appliances, hands down.

Which is part of my point--this state has a lot to be proud of in its manufacturing heritage.  Changing the design of the goods doesn't change the commitment of Michigan workers.

---

by: eartha651 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 12:51:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And... (4.00 / 1)

the Acid Test is by Tom Wolfe.  It's about Ken Kesey.  Brain fart alert.

---

by: eartha651 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 12:53:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Figured you for a commie (0.00 / 0)

  all this time, now you disappoint me.

  :P   :P  :P

---

by: David Boyle @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 13:51:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Clarifying Marx (4.00 / 1)

A common criticism, too much government:

Repsonse: Actually Marx's political "goal", if you will, was what he called the withering away of the State. In many ways, Marx is much more concerned with the growth of the individual human being than is often believed. The big government aspect is supposed to be only a transitional phase as the dictatorship of the proletariat seizes the means of production. Parallel to the relief from their being alienated from product, species-being, other men, and productive activity, human beings transform and begin to re-integrate, thus becoming less accumulative and selfish than much of the theory of liberalism would have as being essential to human nature. Hence, a large State apparatus as we know it ceases to be necessary. I tend to think of this as human beings matured to the extent of not requiring babysitters such as the three G's of God, guns, and government.

"We are the music-makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams" -Arthur O'Shaughnessy

---

by: Michael Motta @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 21:38:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Fair enough... (4.00 / 1)

I still would never advocate for a Socialist economy, though.  Complete ownership by the Government puts too much power in their hands.  No regulation of the capitalistic marketplace puts too much power into the hands of the CEOs as well.  We need regulation of private enterprise to keep the system of checks and balances that are necessary in our democracy.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:39:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

This is interesting... (4.00 / 1)

There's an interesting relationship between communism and environmentalism in that because both offer critiques on capitalism, it's often assumed that if you're the one you're also the other.  Earlier today, I found the pejorative, "Environmentalists are like watermelons -- green outside, red inside," floating around somewhere.

It's ridiculous, of course, on several levels ... not the least of which is that Republicans disengaged from the environment at the beginning of the Reagan years.  I'm also assuming that the underlying reality, that communism and environmentalism offer critiques of capitalism, is overlooked and that the two are conflated ignorant of that similarity; and that when you hear someone bitch about big cars, it's because it's assumed that big cars are what America is all about and that only a commie must hate them, 'cause commies hate America.  Nevermind how badly Soviet-style socialism degraded the environment behind the Iron Curtain.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:48:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's a double standard... (4.00 / 1)

The reason why Communism was viewed so badly by Americans all these years was because of the totalitarian state that led to the abuse of human rights by a Government that had no system of checks and balances.

And yet in the name of fighting terrorism, the right has welcomed the erosion of human rights and the Constitution in the name of "freedom".  The right is far more communistic than liberals are in this way.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 23:00:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So the question is... (4.00 / 2)

Does this buy Dingell a primary?  What is the mood as folks see it in Ann Arbor and other parts of his district outside of Wayne County?

I'd have to imagine Lynn Rivers has seen some of these developments and began to make a few calls...

Believe it or not I think Dingell is very beatable in a primary.  His play the middle game on Iraq and this CAFE stuff have basically given Washtenaw County up for grabs to a progressive challenger.  And in parts of Wayne County his age can certainly be made an issue (there is a very strong under current, I have seen it first hand, that Dingell is just too old).  Monroe County then becomes the key in a primary and that maybe Dingell's only firewall against a forced retirement (note the lack of early anywhere in that statement).

I think it makes for very interesting political theater, I have no dog in the fight other than maybe a little fear forcing The Dean to find some common sense on engery policy.

---

by: 48101 Guy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 09:27:09 AM CDT

Incredibly Short Sighted (4.00 / 1)

Wait a minute people. 

Stop and think. 

Running a primary against John Dingell makes about as much sense as Ralph Nader running against Al Gore.  We've had six years of George Bush to ponder what a good idea that was.

Why on earth would the people of Michigan want to take out the Country's most senior member of Congress? When he last chaired the Energy and Commerce Committee, 50% of all legislation that was signed into law went through his committee.  Next to the Speaker, John Dingell is arguably the single most powerful Member of Congress. 

And let's be clear that is a good thing -- because he is a Labor/Liberal/Democrat!  For goodness sake this guy has been for a single payer health care system for 50 years!

While John Dingell may not pass every 21st century environmental litmus test, don't forget, as the Time magazine article above points out:

Between 1964 and 1974, Dingell was a driving force behind the National Wilderness Act, the Water Quality Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, wetlands preservation and bans on ocean dumping and the hunting of sea mammals.

Opposing John Dingell because he is not Liberal enough will only lead to extinction -- of Liberals.

If John Dingell doesn't fit the criteria of Liberal then maybe it's time to rename this site Michigan Purist instead of Michigan Liberal

---

by: Jrjr @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 15:03:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Very false comparison... (4.00 / 1)

and if I may, you are the one being short sighted. Protecting a very old Democrat in a moderately safe district when he could be replaced by someone other than a family member seem long term to me.

I know there is a very long tradition in Michigan of both political parties being controlled by roughly 12 families, but damn people. let's stop with the idea that challenges in primaries are by the very nature bad things.

This isn't the Club for Growth strategy we are talking about here...we are talking about going after very old and very insulated Democrats who have been in power far too long and treat their position as a right and not part of the democratic process.

So I say "hell yes" on primary challenges, especially if the DINO is in a safe Democratic district...

Am I being an ideological purist...of course damn it! If I can't be an ideological purist in safe Democratic districts...what's the fecking point of it all?!?!?!

As far as comparing this to Nader..please. Not every challenge is similar. The US is much more homogeneous than Dingell's district is...and BTW, assuming that all those poeple would have voted for Gore is also incorrect.

Leave the Green's alone...it was those thousands of old people who couldn't read a ballot/Gore/Young people/African Americans/distancing from Clinton/etc...that lost the election...if in fact he lost it.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 17:03:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

woops (4.00 / 1)

that would be "the US is much more heterogeneous...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 17:04:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Life's Unfair -- Get Over It (4.00 / 1)

I know there is a very long tradition in Michigan of both political parties being controlled by roughly 12 families, but damn people. let's stop with the idea that challenges in primaries are by the very nature bad things.

Personally I am focused on moving our agenda forward.  If that means getting in bed with the Levin's, Dingell's, Kildee's and Cavanaugh's of Michigan politics -- hand me my PJ's.  They sure as hell beat the Bush, Taft, and Romney dynasties any day. Again, politics is about making real world choices among real people.  Does that mean historic families have an unfair advantage?  No question. Oh well, I guess life's unfair.  You've got to pick your bigger evil, nepotism or right wingism. 

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:10:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

where did this come from? (4.00 / 2)

How can you relate a response to challenging the entrenched power interests in either party with whining about life being unfair.

In case you missed the point...Challenging an incumbent Democrat who stinks is as important as challenging a Republican who stinks (Joe Lieberman anyone).

Rather than focus on the Nader comparison, not too many are talking about the obvious comparison...Lamont.

And it was the entrenched party establishment that fought us tooth and nail.

The sooner everyone realizes that some heads need to be collected before the Democrats in Washington start to pay attention, the better. Or you can continue to see BS like the Iraq capitulation, Free trade boondoggles, K-Street projects, funding for abstinence only programs, etc.

You be the party shill...I actual place my country higher than devotion to my party.

Now, that being said, is Dingell that bad? There are people much higher on the list and most of them not in this state.

At the same time, when did it become OK to piss on people for holding their elected officials and fellow party members' feet to the fire.

There is a Democratic Congress because of us...the volunteers.

If you want people to work in the interest of getting Democrats elected to office, you have to understand that they buy something with the labor...

The Democrats have to be weened from two decades of sucking up to special interests and ignoring the grass roots.

So yes, the families that think they control the Michigan Democratic Party can help all they want, until they think they own the damn party...when that happens, they can STFU...or step aside.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 10:51:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

What's wrong with Liberals (4.00 / 1)

It strikes me that this is a very important conversation about where we as progressive/liberal/left leaning people in Michigan should be

This discussion brings to mind much of what I find wrong with the Liberal/Progressive/Left/Environmental/Socialist Movement.  Since I find previous arguments to be both, in their specifics and generalizations, dangerously wrongheaded, I feel compelled to respond in detail and sincerely hope that my comments bring about a serious dialogue here at Michigan Liberal.  I intend to deconstruct the previous post and respond to each of the arguments in separate threads to spur discussion on each point.  In each case I will highlight the essence of the previous argument and offer a response.

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:02:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I Agree With Leaving the Greens Alone (4.00 / 1)

Oftimes when reading this website I get the feeling it should be called "Michigan Democrat" instead of "Michigan Liberal". If people think that the Green Party is too far to the left to be considered liberal, that I can stomach, though not necessarily agree with. But when the Green Party is scapegoated and accused of "stealing" votes from Dems, that's just plain being an illiberal liberal. I don't like the terminology of "stealing" votes, but if we must think of it that way, my bet is that the Democrats "steal" far more votes from the Greens than vice versa. I suspect that the reasoning "I'd vote Green but they can't win" (resulting in a Dem vote) is far more pervasive than the reasoning "I'd vote Dem but they're too far right" (resulting in a Green vote).

I think that in a lot of other countries, especially in Europe, they see us as crazy to make such a big to-do distinction between Democrats and Republicans, as many see them as being subtly different shades of the same thing. I agree with this during some election cycles (though not all) but so loathesome do I usually find the Republican shade, that I will vote for Dems, but only if no Greens are running or I've at least considered the Green and found he/she significantly inferior to the Dem candidate. I like to support a small upcoming party that values roughly what I value, and as side-effect of this I like sending a message to the Democratic Party that there are still people on the Left to consider instead of always trying to buy the center by moving Right.

"We are the music-makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams" -Arthur O'Shaughnessy

---

by: Michael Motta @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:04:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

True... (4.00 / 1)

It's not the job of Greens to get Republicans or Democrats elected to office.  It's their job to get Greens elected to office.

Democrats may not like that they have to run against Greens and Republicans at the same time, but last I checked the Libertarians and the Constitution party aren't doing the Republicans any favors, either.

Greens didn't give the election to Bush in 2000, Gore and the DNC did.  If Gore had run a stronger campaign, and if the DNC had worked to create a grassroots campaign in states like Idaho, South Dakota, and Wyoming, Florida wouldn't have even been an issue.  They ignored those states at their own peril.  And in 2002 and 2004 it continued to bite them in the ass.

Besides, we still don't know if all the Nader voters would've stayed at home on election day had he not been running.  2000 had a low turnout because neither Bush or Gore was inspiring anybody.

If people are voting Green because they aren't satisfied with Democrats, it's not the fault of the Greens.  It's the fault of the Democrats.  Even right now we're (the Democrats) mad at the Dems in Congress for not being strong enough on ending the war, standing up to Bush, and getting in the media and letting America know that Bush is a psycho.

On the State level, we're mad that Dillon isn't tearing into Bishop like a man who just insulted his mother.  Seriously, Dillon (I know you read this blog) if I told you Bishop called your mom fat, would you go and beat the hell out him already?  Which is worse, a man who insults your mom, or a man trying to destroy our State?  Bishop isn't your friend, Andy.  If he were an ice cream flavor, he'd be pralines and dick!  Same goes for our State Senate leadership.  They need to be in the media and tearing Bishop apart until he's shamed into doing the right thing.

Votes for Greens will continue until the Democratic party decides to take charge.  And I'm saying that as a straight-ticket voting Democrat.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:55:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Get in the Game -- 2 parties make your choice (4.00 / 1)

We as Liberals need to pull our heads out of our asses and confront the reality of Nader, the Greens, and ideological purism.  While Al Gore and the Democratic Party certainly contributed to our defeat in 2000, make no mistake, if Ralph Nader had not been on the ballot, Al Gore would be president today, our country would never have invaded Iraq, and I submit we would not be having a debate about the scientific legitimacy global warming.

While I admire Ralph Nader's contribution to consumer protection, I hope he and everyone who voted for him goes to bed every night feeling in part responsible for the more than 3000 soldiers and countless civilians who have died in Iraq since Nader threw the election to Bush.

Furthermore, as a Michigan Liberal, I must note that the Green party has continued to hurt our cause.  Progressive Democrats would control the Michigan Senate today if it were not for the Green Party.  Democrats came up two seats short of the majority in the last election, by less than 1500 votes.  The Green Party candidates in the two closest races received over 3500 votes.  The two loosing Democrats in those races would be among the Senate's most Liberal - Andy Levin and Carl Williams. 

Even more distressing, this means had the Green Party not fielded candidates in these two races, Democrats would control Michigan's Senate, Mark Schauer would be the Majority Leader and Lt. Governor John Cherry would be casting tie breaking votes to protect our public schools, universities and health care institutions. 

So, I am sorry if I feel little sympathy for Greens, Nader and so called Liberals who have set our cause back immeasurably.  We must stop thinking of pure ideology and get in the game of politics lest we become nothing more than a debating society. 

And in essence, that is why John Dingell is one of my Liberal Heroes

 

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 23:08:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Please don't do repeat posts. (4.00 / 2)

It wastes bandwidth.  Besides, I was responding to someone else to make my point to be polite towards you (stating my point without being argumentative).

Still, if you want to go there, I'll point out that if Democrats want to win, they'll have to campaign against the third parties as well.  Welcome to the real world.  It isn't fair, and not everyone wants to vote for what they consider "the lesser of the two evils".  If the Democrats want to win, they have to be willing to kick ass and lead.  Period.  Otherwise people will continue to vote green.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 23:17:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry about the double post..but the point is still valid...Greens cost progressives in many elections (4.00 / 1)

If you care about liberal/left/progressive values and vote against Democrats in competitive races you might as well be voting for the Republicans, particularly in marginal races such as the presidencey, and these two key state senate races. 

If you care more about the principal of meaningless third parties than you do advancing progresive values so be it, but don't pretend you care about the underlynig principles when you vote for the Greens...it's simply irrational.

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 23:26:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So what are you suggesting? (4.00 / 1)

A constitutional ammendment for a two-party system?  You might get bi-partisan support for that in Congress but it certaintly wouldn't be good for our Democracy.

I already said I vote straight ticket Dem, but I'm letting you know the realities of what's on the ground.  Democrats have to lead and kick ass if they don't want to lose by a few hundred votes because of a third party.  Blaming Greens for their loss is about as effective as blaming Republicans.  Neither side cares.  If the Democrats really want to keep Greens from causing them to lose, they need to be the party of the people and stand up to the establishment.  Otherwise it will keep happening.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 23:31:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Think before you Vote -- And File for Office for that Matter (0.00 / 0)

I'm certainly not advocating a limitation to political free speech, rather advocating smart people think before they vote and run for office.

Let's look at the Saginaw and Oakland County State Senate races where the Greens cost Democrats control of the State Senate. 

There were no other third party candidates other than Greens..Democrats fielded the most liberal possible candidates ... Andy Levin ... who makes Carl and Sandy look like right wingers ... and Carl Williams who is the first African American to represent Saginaw and a very progressive Democrat.

There is no credible analyst or observer who does not believe that the Green's cost Democrats these two seats.

Let's be clear, as a result of the Green candiacies...Mike Bishop is the Senate majority leader and Governor Granholm is struggling to implement her agenda.  None of which is good for progressives.

While I too would never vote for a Green party candidate, I must call out anyone who suggests that running for, voting for, or offering aid and confort to the Greens is other than a traitor to the progressive cause given the reality of our winner take all two party democracy,

Sorry that's just been my experience. 

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 23:46:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Hilarious (4.00 / 3)

I would reckon that that the Left in much of the civilized world (meaning not the United States at the moment) would howl with laughter at the suggestion that the Democratic Party of the United States of America stands as the do-not-touch-darling of the "progressive cause". If Granholm and Bishop and the rest of them are so hurt by Greens, then why doesn't the Democratic Party stand for the Left that Greens supposedly "steal" from them? The reason why people vote Green is because the Democratic Party is only progressive by virtue of it's being compared to the fascist veering Republican Party. On a global scale the Democratic Party is moderate at best, but likely slightly to the Right!

Don't call me a traitor to "the progressive cause" when the Democratic Party still has people who support things like a Flag Amendment, like the war in Iraq, like enormous defense budgets, privately run health care, 40+ hour work weeks, extremely weak emissions standards, use of coal for power, private transit over public transit, laws against public nudity, the Patriot Act, and any number of other Right Wing, anti-civil liberties, huge military-industrial complex, environmental cavings-in. How many Democrats are openly atheistic or agnostic?  The Democratic Party is not the voice of the Left.


"We are the music-makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams" -Arthur O'Shaughnessy

---

by: Michael Motta @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 00:41:56 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

If if if (4.00 / 1)

The Greens didn't cost the election anymore than those voters who couldn't read did...

No one single thing or event costs an election...

The Greens have a right to contest elections.

Are you ready to give back the first Clinton term because if Ross Perot hadn't run, George HW Bush would have been president...

Or do we only care about parties on the left?

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 10:57:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

The Greens (4.00 / 1)

All of this carping about the Greens hurting the Dems would go away if we actually had proportional representation in our Congress. Something that exists in just about every other major democracy (UK, France, Germany). Then the %5 or more who voted Green would see their views represented in Congress, instead of being completely shut out. But fundamental change at the constitutional level would require overcoming a LOT of inertia with our 2-party system.

---

by: rich @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 20:40:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So the problem with John Dingell is his wife? (0.00 / 0)

Protecting a very old Democrat in a moderately safe district when he could be replaced by someone other than a family member seem long term to me.

I thought we were talking about running a primary against John Dingell, the dean of the Congress, not his wife or his son, which would be an interesting and different conversation.  At 80 years old, Dingell could serve for as much as a decade or more.  So it seems to me as a Michigan Liberal, I should be focused on Dingell's future not the possibility of his dynasty.

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:08:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Seems you don't know too much about Michigan politics than (4.00 / 1)

how many Levins, Kildees and Cherrys do we have running around the state.

There's a long tradition of a small number of families controlling the state party...

Maybe that's OK with you, I think it's time to broaden the franchise a little.

And as for how old his is, how's that working out for the party?

We have so many old members of Congress, because of the fact that we only had safe Democratic districts that we now have no one credible to run in 2010 when Granholm is term limited out. The Republican, have a whole bunch, however.

BTW: One simple point you seem to be ignoring. In a safe district, the actual election is the primary and not the general election. Are you suggesting that we not have a democratic process?

As far as your points about seniority are concerned, it doesn't matter. Congress hasn't worked that way in over 15 years. Chair are term limited after six years and the Speaker has the authority to nominate people over someone with more seniority if a majority of the caucus agrees.

And for an important state like Michigan, the Democratic leadership is not going to leave us hanging...even if we return 9 freshmen members.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 11:04:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's about what we do not how we do it. (4.00 / 1)

? we are talking about going after very old and very insulated Democrats who have been in power far too long and treat their position as a right and not part of the democratic process.

If your view is that we should be cleansing the political process to make room for the young, unconnected and pure...have at it...I am more concerned with moving a progressive agenda.

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:13:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

For some reason you continue to misrepresent my points (4.00 / 1)

I don't know why, but you do.

But keep up the strawmen, it is almost Halloween...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 11:07:28 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Winning the fight matters (4.00 / 1)

So I say "hell yes" on primary challenges, especially if the DINO is in a safe Democratic district...
Am I being an ideological purist...of course damn it! If I can't be an ideological purist in safe Democratic districts...what's the fecking point of it all?!?!?!

People -- it's about making progress on a progressive agenda -- and that takes power not purity!

Give me an 80% liberal who is in a position of influence/power over a 100% liberal who is irrelevant to the political process any day of the week.  Seems like an easy choice. 

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:14:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Again...strawman (4.00 / 2)

Are you saying that Joe Lieberman, a 95% Democrat and 5% asshole on Iraq is not a problem, we should keep him?

If so, it say an awful lot about your strategy.

The things that is in the 20% matters, and you are ignoring this point continuously.

Do I think Dingell falls into this category? No.

Do I think he should get chided for it? Yes.

Do I think there are some issues that Democrats should get replaced over? Depends.

Is it a safe district or competitive?
IS it an important issue (Iraq) or non-important?

As far as your point about power in Congress, your understanding of how it operates is flawed. You have this 1970s view of a 21st century House. Seniority plays a part in control, but doesn't matter.

The evidence for this should be the very simple example of Dingell's bill. How'd that work out for Mr. Chair?

And if meaningless gestures is what you have in mind re: power, you need to go back to the drawing board.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 11:14:05 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Vote Green! Vote Republican! It's the Same Thing! (0.00 / 0)

As far as comparing this to Nader..please. Not every challenge is similar. The US is much more homogeneous than Dingell's district is...and BTW, assuming that all those poeple would have voted for Gore is also incorrect.
Leave the Green's alone...it was those thousands of old people who couldn't read a ballot/Gore/Young people/African Americans/distancing from Clinton/etc...that lost the election...if in fact he lost it.

We as Liberals need to pull our heads out of our asses and confront the reality of Nader, the Greens, and ideological purism.  While Al Gore and the Democratic Party certainly contributed to our defeat in 2000, make no mistake, if Ralph Nader had not been on the ballot, Al Gore would be president today, our country would never have invaded Iraq, and I submit we would not be having a debate about the scientific legitimacy global warming.

While I admire Ralph Nader's contribution to consumer protection, I hope he and everyone who voted for him goes to bed every night feeling in part responsible for the more than 3000 soldiers and countless civilians who have died in Iraq since Nader threw the election to Bush.

Furthermore, as a Michigan Liberal, I must note that the Green party has continued to hurt our cause.  Progressive Democrats would control the Michigan Senate today if it were not for the Green Party.  Democrats came up two seats short of the majority in the last election, by less than 1500 votes.  The Green Party candidates in the two closest races received over 3500 votes.  The two loosing Democrats in those races would be among the Senate's most Liberal - Andy Levin and Carl Williams. 

Even more distressing, this means had the Green Party not fielded candidates in these two races, Democrats would control Michigan's Senate, Mark Schauer would be the Majority Leader and Lt. Governor John Cherry would be casting tie breaking votes to protect our public schools, universities and health care institutions. 

So, I am sorry if I feel little sympathy for Greens, Nader and so called Liberals who have set our cause back immeasurably.  We must stop thinking of pure ideology and get in the game of politics lest we become nothing more than a debating society. 

And in essence, that is why John Dingell is one of my Liberal Heroes! 

---

by: phil hart's legacy @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:23:03 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not entirely... (4.00 / 2)

Back in 2000, I was a Nader voter, but not because I actually wanted him to win.

Let's not forget that although Al Gore will probably be remembered for having brought the environment back to the public consciousness, he's still really a fairly moderate Democrat on lots of thing (today, compared to the King Hell loons of the Republican Party, he looks like a Molotov Cocktail throwing Bolsheivik).  And, for the things I liked about Bill Clinton (namely, that his mere presence in the Oval Office caused -- and still causes -- so much grief to the easily enraged on the Right), one of them was not what he did for the environment.  He essentialy coopted the Republican plank of "let's all get rich and drive big gas-guzzling cars and not care about what it does to our habitat -- wheeeee!"  And, that was the face of the Democratic Party (and one of the reasons why I'm so disinterested in putting his wife in power, 'cause I get the impression that she's not a hell of a lot different).

So, to me, Ralph Nader was a healthy way to register a complaint with the Democratic Party that they ought to remember that while the Republicans had essentially abandoned the environment in the early 80s, that they were at risk of doing the same ... and taking for granted the votes of environmentalists at the same time.

I always see lots of people claim that means I helped put George Bush in office.  Oddly, at the time, many of them were the same people complained that the Electoral College is outdated because Al Gore won the popular vote.  At the time, I lived in here in Michigan, and it was so obvious going into the last weekend of campaigning that Al Gore was going to win the state (he had something like an 8- or 10-point lead, I seem to recall).  So, I could safely cast a vote for Nader, send my little message to the Democratic Party (I still don't think they got it), and not worry about putting history's worst president in office.  In fact, the morning of Election Day, I put in a call to a friend of mine living in Lawrence, Kansas, to see if there was anyone out there with which I could do a vote swap -- they vote for Nader, I vote for Gore, Gore gets a vote in a state where his lead was only 10 points (Kansas went for Bush practically at noon, eight hours before the polls closed), and the protest is registered.  The problem?  Everyone I knew out in Kansas was already voting for Nader.

The reason Al Gore lost the election isn't because of Ralph Nader, but because he ran a poor campaign, listened to bad advisers, and because the Democratic Party had spent so much time trying to offer a sexier, smarter version of the Republican platform that it forgot to figure out if people were going to buy it.

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 07:25:10 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Votes aren't stolen (4.00 / 2)

they are earned. And until you understand this, you're going to continue to fail to address the underlying causes of why Democrats lose elections.

It. Is. That. Simple.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 11:17:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

What kind of lunatic strategiy is that? (4.00 / 1)

Yes, by all means let's defeat Dingell. Let's gain control of the House and then bring down the most powerful MI Dem in the delegation who has won awards for his environmental work (from the Michigan Environmental Council) all because...drumbeat...he's not with us on CAFE and is pushing a poison California provision--definitely not good for us humans--but that ain't goin' no place in Californian Nancy Pelosi's Congress.  Defeating Dingell argues for also taking out every single Democrat in the Michigan delegation and both Senators since none of them have been good on CAFE.  That would include folks like Kildee, Levin etc since the purist argument is to take on Dems in Dem districts who are not 100% with us. I am sure that will catch on with the progressive crowd. 

---

by: LiberalBubba @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 17:51:23 PM CDT

To whom are you responding? (4.00 / 1)

It helps if you click the reply button so people know who you are responding to...

To respond to your point about how important he is...

Then you have nothing to worry about if that is the view of his constituents...right?

I am beginning to understand why the Republicans call us the Democrat Party...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 21:16:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree. (4.00 / 2)

No politician is perfect, and Dingell has his flaws, but he's still a far cry from Lieberman.

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:43:29 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Agreed (4.00 / 2)

I don't think Dingell needs to be replaced and would not support a primary.

But let us not attack people for suggesting any primary challenges against Democrats. It is as wrongheaded as those who suggest a primary challenge at the drop of a hat.

Instead, let's focus on the merit of the office holder and the importance of the transgression.

Speaker Pelosi has kind of made the whole thing mute...but Dingell should know there are people who will be pissed off enough to take action should he try and muscle this thing through.

Why? Because it hurts the large, more important issue of what the Democratic Party stands for. Some folks have been hammering the Greens, so tell me, if the Democratic Congress passes this, how is it the Greens fault that we opened up general election challenges across the US?

Please, bigger picture people....

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 11:22:17 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

How is/was my post a strategy? (4.00 / 2)

It was a question asking folks if they thought these developments might have bought Dingell a primary?  If asking a question raises such an ire in some circles I guess we can assume from there.  I have no strong feeling either way but I do know just from a horse race perspective a primary in the 15th would be very interesting (and yes it's a safe seat so all these Nader-Green comparasions are way off).

I like Dingell and support him, although he clearly still needs some nudging on global warming, my question wasn't meant to be a proposal for a primary.

Now if we want to talk about his family and the race to replace him we could really have some fun.  But that is another thread.  Perhaps we do need a discussion of the Democratic Bench in Michigan (maybe my first diary???)

---

by: 48101 Guy @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 11:54:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

All I know is (4.00 / 1)

that this thread has so many replies now, we've gone into plaid...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 14:35:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

We've gone to plaid! (4.00 / 1)

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 18:46:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dem bench discussion, yes! (4.00 / 1)

We have mostly elderly incumbents in the congressional delegation. 

Dingell's successor?  Is it Chris, Debbie or a non-Dingell?
Kildee:  His nephew Dan Kildee is county treasurer and would be my first choice
Levin:  Gee, could it be Andy?
Conyers:  Kilpatrick...that's the mayor I'm thinkin' of.

---

by: LiberalBubba @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 17:07:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ahhh Democracy (4.00 / 1)

So we are finally transferring our tin pot sytle democracy to the Presidential level...

Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton...

Is the talent pool really that shallow or is the something inherently wrong with the health of our democracy that we are building an entrenched political aristocracy?

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Jun 09, 2007 at 18:50:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm working on my first diary.... (4.00 / 2)

It will be an in-depth look at the Dem Bench for statewide races, Congressionals and other up and comers, hope to have it posted sometime early this week but alas the rest of my day is now officially devoted to the Soprano's...check back soon.

---

by: 48101 Guy @ Sun Jun 10, 2007 at 15:44:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I forgot to add (4.00 / 1)

the picture isn't as bleek as one might think at first galnce (espcially is you're concerned about a lot of the same last names)

---

by: 48101 Guy @ Sun Jun 10, 2007 at 15:45:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not really (4.00 / 1)

I am just being sarky!

Look forward to the diary...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sun Jun 10, 2007 at 15:53:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just 14 (well, 13) more comments and we hit 100... (4.00 / 1)

w00t!  w00t!

Among the Trees

---

by: Eric B. @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 22:19:54 PM CDT

And this makes 100! (4.00 / 1)

Woo-hoo!  Triple digits!

Putting conservatives in charge of our government makes about as much sense as GM hiring a CEO who hates cars.

---

by: djtyg @ Fri Jun 08, 2007 at 23:44:08 PM CDT

Dingell's White House pals? (0.00 / 0)

  See AP via Salon, Feds Working Against CA Emissions Law,

  "Transportation Department officials sought to mobilize dozens of state and federal lawmakers against California's petition for an EPA waiver to implement its greenhouse gas law, documents released Friday show.
  The 71 pages of Transportation Department e-mails and internal memos, released to congressional Democrats, show that as EPA's June 15 comment deadline approached, Transportation Department officials compiled call lists of House members and governors in states with significant numbers of auto plants. ...
  The auto industry opposes a waiver for California."

  Looks like J. Ding has some interesting friends.

---

by: David Boyle @ Sat Jun 30, 2007 at 19:06:56 PM CDT

GM "Transformers" crutch (0.00 / 0)

  Detroit auto folk must be getting truly desperate: see Freep, MAKING STARS OF CARS: GM hopes for an image boost as 4 of its vehicles score big roles in the long-awaited 'Transformers' movie,

  "...The "Transformers" movie will give four General Motors vehicles one of the biggest product-placement opportunities ever for an automotive company.
  If the flick is as huge as some people are predicting, it could help transform perceptions of GM in ways that may play out for years to come. ..."

  Maybe a real-life "transformation" of US cars into more energy-efficient vehicles might be even better for GM and Detroit than some science-fiction glamorized toy-car fantasy, used as a crutch instead of real-world improvement?
  But what do I know.

---

by: David Boyle @ Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 22:08:57 PM CDT

WDIV-TV just featured the GM-"Transformers" connection (4.00 / 1)

Steve Garagiola held up one of the little gizmos at the end of the newscast.

Please read "Out of Iraq: A Practical Plan for Withdrawal Now" by George McGovern and William R. Polk.

---

by: Hy Dudgeon @ Sun Jul 01, 2007 at 22:38:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ah gizmo (0.00 / 0)

  Is he Joe's son?

---

by: David Boyle @ Mon Jul 02, 2007 at 09:34:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]