Greg Sargent doesn’t think the Weiner rant is good politics:
Dems would be far better served if they kept calmly repeating that Republicans want government to fail, in order to breed cynicism and to get voters to give up on the idea that government works for them.
By the way, there’s precedent for this. Remember when former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle erupted on the Senate floor in 2002 in response to Bush’s rank politicization of national security in the runup to the midterm elections? That didn’t work, either.
To be clear, I’m all for the kind of passion Weiner is showing here, but let’s direct it properly. Don’t get into a shouting match about procedure. As emotionally satisfying as it may be to watch, raging against the GOP opposition machine’s successful efforts to tie Dems in knots just makes Dems look whiny, weak and impotent.
I suspect that nothing that you do on the floor of Congress, even beating another Congressman nearly to death, makes very much difference politically. Personally, I enjoyed the rant because I think Weiner made a good point. But I have to file “if only Democrats showed passion” with “if only America really tried to defeat its enemies” and “if only Obama used the 11-dimensional bully pulpit to say `pass the damn bill'” in the category of Green Lantern political theories.
Democrats will get hosed this fall because of a shitty economy, not because of their failure to get angry (though I think you can argue that if Chuck Schumer were running the Senate and sticking horse heads in people’s beds, things might be different, but maybe that’s just another Green Lantern theory too). And as Democrats become a dominant majority party over the next 10 years or so, it will be because Republicans alienated all the non-white voters, not because Democrats grew a spine (except to the extent that taking a sane course on immigration can be considered growing a spine).
TR
That’s a horrible comparison, for many reasons — but one that stands out is that Bush succeeded in bulldozing his opposition because he painted himself as the protector and avenger of the 9/11 victims. Which is precisely what Weiner is doing.
kommrade reproductive vigor
Rage makes you look weak? Uh. No.
Unless you meant I, Weiner in some sort of Asimovian sense.
shortstop
Sure, but look — the people who are only half-paying attention, which is most voters — still have no idea of how much (or how) the Republican caucus is obstructing literally every piece of Dem-supported legislation. Anything that draws voters’ attention to that may have value, especially since people react differently to different delivery methods (“calmly repeating” vs. drama-kinging it up).
mistermix
I want repetition of how Republicans are blocking everything, punctuated by occasional outbursts by Democrats whose constituents are being screwed. It doesn’t have to be an either/or.
Though I agree with your last paragraph – this is all window dressing compared to the state of the economy.
arguingwithsignposts
Sargent is sounding a lot like David Broder here.
DougJ
@arguingwithsignposts:
I wouldn’t go that far. I think he has a point, just not one I completely agree with.
Xero
If the Dems get hosed this fall, the economy will likely be a major factor in said hosing. The perception of dems as weak, ineffectual leaders has its place as well.
While I don’t think screaming matches are the way to go, a certain amount of anger is warranted and certainly couldn’t hurt. This draws attention to Weiner, but it also draws attention to the callousness and party-first mentality of the Republicans that Weiner is railing about.
If voters are going to vote based on the economy, they should know who it is that’s standing in the way of economic improvement.
NonyNony
I agree, but the point that Greg Sargent is implicitly making is also wrong – for most Congressmen, showing that they’re angry isn’t going to hurt anything either. And since being calm and collected hasn’t helped much, why not try something different?
For the record – I don’t think Weiner was thinking “strategy” when he went off – I think he was pissed. And there are people who respect that. Greg Sargent isn’t one of them, but maybe Weiner also doesn’t give a rat’s ass what Greg Sargent thinks. For all I like his work, Sargent is still very much a creature of the bubble, and I don’t think he quite gets that people out in the real world really do appreciate righteous passion when it’s honestly felt.
Danton
No, it was entirely appropriate rage given the fact that Weiner represents families of 9/11in the NY-9th. If I’d lost a family member in the WTC or if my or a family member’s health was impaired in the clean-up, I’d be absolutely outraged with the Republicans over this. And I’d sure as hell want my representative to be outraged, too.
John Bird
Now if only Weiner could stop aiding and abetting the killing of Palestinians, I might be able to muster some respect for the guy.
Steve
I doubt it matters a bit to the mythical undecided voter. I do think it serves to rally the base.
shortstop
It really isn’t an either-or proposition: you can never yell vs. yelling is always useful…not sure why the false binary construction.
Allan
Sargent is sounding defensive in his comment section and on Twitter.
We need more strong Democratic voices, and some of them need to sound like Weiner. We’ve seen for the past two years that a big chunk of the progressive left responds affirmatively to strong rhetoric and drawing clear dividing lines between our positions and those of our opponents. Why can’t they enjoy this moment?
Obama can still be Presidential and above the fray, but Sargent needs to get off his fainting couch and stroll down the streets of Manhattan for a few minutes to see how people express themselves in the real world. It’s not pretty, genteel or civil out there.
El Tiburon
Oh, piss off already. I am sick and tired of this type of ‘constructive criticism’.
We need more Weiners (insert Beavis and Butthead laugh here) and Graysons out there. Americans could care less about what is said, but how it is said. I, for one, want a politician who shows not passion, but rage. Milky-Toast Harry Reid and the occasional faux-outrage of a Dodd are so done.
We are all getting it in the ass and Sargent wants the directed properly.
Here, see if this passion is directed properly: go fug yourself.
DougJ
@Steve:
That may be true. I think Sargent overdoes it a bit.
gnomedad
Maybe OT, maybe not … I’ve just started reading Merchants of Doubt. It kicks off with a quote from Adlai Stevenson:
Gretchen D
Personally, I’m not opposed to a good rant. He expressed the frustrations of gobs of us who are fed up and angry with the Rethug obstructionism. And it certainly doesn’t stop us from other “calm” explanations. I really liked “I will not yield.”
Brachiator
This is such nonsense. The Democrats need to clearly articulate the Republican failure.
“The Republicans said that deregulation and tax cuts for the rich would result in a roaring economy and jobs for everyone. When that failed, when the economy collapsed, when hundreds of thousands lost their homes, when millions lost their jobs, when billions of dollars were funneled to the banks, what did the Republicans offer as a solution? More deregulation and more tax cuts for the rich.”
And yeah, there is a lot of room for anger and passion here.
In addition, the Democrats had better come up with more economic solutions that will take effect immediately. Although I have accommodated myself to all the compromises necessary to get health care reform passed, the fact that major provisions don’t kick in until 2014 in some ways makes the passage of the legislation politically invisible.
Ah, here is the bottom line. The Democrats can’t afford to waste time whining that the Republicans want government to fail. They have got to keep finding ways to make the government work and they have to make improvements immediately tangible for citizens, and they have to take credit for their victories, and slam Republicans for their failures.
John Bird
@Allan:
Yes, but you can be guaranteed that Weiner’s “outburst” on the floor was planned, written, proofread and vetted before he said a word.
cat48
Weiner is more angry than normal; but it does appear genuine. I have no problem w/it. It fits his explosive personality; plus, it’s nice to see him screaming at rethugs for a change instead of someone in the Senate or the prez.
mnpundit
First a reminder: Weiner is an Israel-right-or-wrong guy. You can tell by his despicable comments on the flotilla attack.
Second: I think the rant is good and while saying that if the Dems were suddenly full of Graysons and angry Weiners (heh) things would be magically better is wrong, DougJ is as usually ignoring the obvious.
Stuff like this sends a clear message that “Democrats in congress are as pissed off as Republicans as you are.” Republicans are psychotic lunatics. They deserve to be exiled to Siberia like the BP CEO, if not worse. Instead we get a lot of bloodless talk about procedure and obstruction or Obama simply undermines liberals in their favor.
More stuff like what happened here would convince the Dems that Democrats ARE fighting for the things we believe in. I can tell you with a great deal of confidence it would improve enthusiasm and turnout on our side.
Zifnab
The economy is where it is because of how the Democrats, collectively, handled the last two years. It could have been a lot worse, for which we can thank the Stimulus. It might have been compounded by future failures, for which HCR and FinReg are meant to forestall.
But if you’re wondering why the housing market continues to tailspin while the big banks and Wall Street execs rake it in, look no farther than HAMP and the Treasury.
Republicans aren’t helping, but Democrats shot themselves in the feet when they lost Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat and proceeded to compromise away on health care and financial reform and war funding.
Likewise, if Republicans are curious why they might lose the Texas Governorship or the California Gov and Senate races or a host of pickup House seats, they can look no farther than their crappy record on race relations.
But let’s not just throw up our hands and say, “Shitty economy – hoocodanode?!” and wave off the Democratic loses in 2010 as accidental or inevitable.
angler
The 1856 caning of Charles Sumner by a S. Carolina congressman angry at Sumner’s criticism of his uncle, a proslavery senator, occurred within a week of a proslavery raid on the abolitionist town of Lawrence, Kansas. Together these two examples of slaveholder aggression re-focused public attention in the North on slavery and away from nativism, the main issue of the then formidable Know Nothing party. In the fall elections, The GOP crushed the Know Nothings and the Democrats in the North and built up a congressional presence that led them to the White House in 1860. Sumner recovered from his wounds and led the radical wing of the Republicans through the war and Reconstruction.
Allison W.
I don’t think rage makes you look whiny, I think it can make you look like you have lost control. It also depends on the person. Weiner is known for this type of behavior, so is Alan Grayson and barney frank can come with it sometimes. So an outburst like this won’t hurt them or the Dems.
What I want to see is consistency from the Dems. Stick with the ‘Republican Tea Party Contract On America’ and say it every day all day.
Alex S.
I think it’s useful to rant every once in a while. It creates attention. Someone like Greg Sargent might know the legislative system inside out, but the average voter doesn’t. He just knows the economy sucks and Congress isn’t doing its part.
Obama’s appearance on “The View” marks the beginning of the midterm campaign. The Dems want to portray the GOP as the party of No! And I think it could be useful to mention that some things might be different if the Republicans wouldn’t be blocking every semi-important bill.
Omnes Omnibus
@mnpundit:
_
Exactly. People are angry and it would help if the Democrats, who are fighting for good results, would be seen as fighting.
Allison W.
@Allan:
Hey, we’re not savages here in Manhattan ya know.
Brachiator
@Zifnab:
I don’t know about the situation in Texas, but the California political scene has nothing to do with race relations. Zip. Nada.
Bob L
Well the Republicans are doing an excellent job of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory with their Dr Evil impression.
The Democrats should really change their motto to “Because you certainly don’t want the other guy.”
Omnes Omnibus
@Allison W.: IN Manahattan, huh? Say hi to my wife who is visiting friends there on the way to a conference in Cambridge. You’ll recognize her. She is the small blond with a nice purse.
Kryptik
The problem isn’t the rage. The problem is that, calm, angry, or not, Dems have been letting the Republicans off too much for their bullshit monolithic stonewalling, and lets face it, this late in the game, the only way to pierce the retarded ‘media narrative’ is to be angry and get cameras on you so you can use the chance to highlight this.
Pointing out the Republicans’ bullshit calmly would be nice, but it also should have been done in great volume ages ago. Instead, Dems got steamrolled by the narrative. I welcome the rage because it’s the only way you’re going to get a real honest-to-god Dem on TV at this point (instead of folk like LIeberman and Conrad, or the ‘Fox Democrats’).
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
The Republicans are traitors and I want somebody who can actually get the microphone for a few minutes to stand up and call them out what they are – a neo-Confederate cabal of vile and evil little men who are doing everything they possibly can to wreck the country because they would rather be rulers in hell than servants in heaven.
If anybody has their fee-fees hurt by that message, then they are part of the problem too and can very well fuck off, thank you very much.
taylormattd
@Zifnab: “The economy is where it is because of how the Democrats, collectively, handled the last two years.”
Wow, how stupid. I guess eight years of the policies of a republican president had nothing to do with the current situation.
Shelton Lankford
I spent most of the last year and a half wondering what the hell the Democrats really wanted to do. It sure did not appear that they wanted a strong health care bill, on the contrary, it appeared to be an effort by all of them to pass something but certainly not anything resembling one that made sense from the standpoint of cost control or effectiveness in addressing the health care needs of the American people.
The same thing occurred with their efforts related to human rights. Zero leadership was shown by anyone except a few gay soldiers, and some vocal critics of torture. No roll-back of Patriot Act erosion of our rights, no real moves toward peace, and no reining in of Israel – on the contrary we remain every bit as much a tool of Israel as we have ever been.
There was a lot of going through the motions, and very little passion shown by anyone. Weiner’s rant was welcomed by anyone who was alarmed by our rapid right turn in 2001 and the utter failure to even attempt a course correction by the administration. It would almost seem that the same people were in charge as in the last administration. We hoped for/expected some change in agenda – it didn’t happen. It was the same old agenda administered by the “mommy” wing of the Corporate Party.
Brachiator
@Bob L:
This is weak and risky to say, “Vote for us. We’re crap, but we’re not as bad as the other guy.”
This kind of thing immediately invites the following response: You said, vote for us because we will bring change. Now you admit that you are weak and feckless, but you still want was to vote for you again?
Also, the “not as bad as the other guy” strategy is tailor made for tea baggers who can say, “both traditional Republicans and Democrats are crap. So vote for our crazy ass guy.”
SGEW
@angler:
Nothing like a little gutta-percha backlash, eh?
Ted the Slacker
Sargent has this ass-backwards.
Pete King is the one looking whiny, weak and impotent. He’s the one on the defensive, saying how he wanted to vote for this bill but the Democrats hurt his fee-fees with a 11th hour procedural trick. Wiener is throwing all the punches here, applying the bitchslap theory of politics.
It may or may not be good politics for Dems, but not for the reasons Sargent thinks.
Allison W.
@Omnes Omnibus:
Ha! Dang! I think I just missed her.
shortstop
I wish people would stop comparing Weiner and Grayson just because they both say what they think in strong terms. With the exception of Weiner’s defense of all Israeli policy, he is many, many miles above Grayson in intellect, political skill, policy formulation and persuasiveness.
Brachiator
@Shelton Lankford:
As important as this might be, you gotta keep in mind Carville’s reminder to Clinton:
I don’t know anyone who, faced with the loss of their home or their job, thinks, “Damn, we just gotta rein in Israel.”
Omnes Omnibus
@Allison W.: It’s a small island; I’m sure you’ll bump into her again.
J.W. Hamner
I usually scoff at people who think that if only Obama would get angry than we’d be living in a progressive wonderland… but I’m not sure there is much reason to criticize Weiner here.
The Dems don’t have the votes to pass anything to help the economy, and unless somebody can convince Bernake to fire up the helicopter (and maybe not even then)… the economy is still going to suck in November.
So what other option is there than keeping putting stuff out there and making a big stink about it when Republicans obstruct the Free Kittens and Ponies Bill? I mean, you gotta go down swinging doncha?
Tom Hilton
Note to all the Sargent-bashers: just because you find something emotionally satisfying, that doesn’t mean it’s tactically or strategically effective.
Jim C
I suspect that nothing that you do on the floor of Congress, even beating another Congressman nearly to death, makes very much difference politically.
I have to pick this nit.
Preston Brooks was a congressman. Charles Sumner was a senator. Brooks wasn’t beating another congressman, he was a congressman beating a senator while another congressman held kept aid away at gunpoint.
It’s a nit, because we don’t generally call senators “congressman” even though they are also members of congress.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
Gotta go with DougJ, Tom Hilton et al on this one. To the average viewer, this is two guys shouting at each other. Most people don’t have the inclination to look at the substance, and the Guardians Of Our Discourse will all fall in line behind Vice Principal Broder when he declares that this kind of shouting is the reason for the kind of absurd vote that prompted it, rather than the other way around. If I were George Will, I’m sure I’d have some Latin phrase involving the words ‘propter’, ‘ergo’ and ‘hoc’ to describe this Beltway fallacy, but I don’t. Expect much tsk-tsking over this clip in the next few days.
PTirebiter
While it’s true, I’m not sure how believable that message will be to independents. Especially when it’s delivered dispassionately. I despise the current GOP, and after the election, it took me quite a while to actually believe they really were going to pull this crap. I think I resisted the reality because the implications were so far beyond cynical.
Allison W.
Watching local news right now: it showed a republican calling the bill a slush fund, then it showed Weiner shouting about procedure, then it showed Rep. King saying Dems have control and if they wanted to pass it, they could pass it. Then they have a recording of Mayor bloomberg blaming both parties.
one thing to remember about outbursts like this: you have to hope that the media picks up on the main point of your outrage.
scav
@Tom Hilton: Emotional satisfaction doesn’t mean the tactic isn’t effective, either. There usually aren’t single, simple, one approach always works solutions to anything.
ETA OT: Can I just add the deep emotional satisfaction I’m getting from the dead silence I’m getting on the phone from the push pollers where I come out strongly in favor of raising taxes? Love. It.
eemom
Please, PLEASE stop buying in to that Republican and emmessemm fueled assumption.
I can’t fathom why people keep doing that. Talk about yer circular firing squad. Talk about shooting your own friggin foot. Another for the “shit sandwich” files.
What. The. Fuck.
Tom Levenson
I think I’m repeating something of the sense of the crowd above, (but they still let me comment! huh) — but there is a real difference between Daschle’s complaint and Weiner’s.
In 2002 Daschle was trying to say that Democrats were just as concerned about terror as the GOP, and that the successful attempt to politicize the issue was a bad thing.
Now, Weiner is saying that the Democrats are very different from the GOP, in that they want to solve problems — specifically here, one tied to GOP, but the extension of the argument makes itself — while all the Republicans are doing here is making it impossible to do anything.
By itself, the rant does little. As something that can rise above the background noise a little to help establish that idea: that whatever the Dems may have done that’s not effective enough, the GOP has already shown it will do either nothing or harm.
You don’t get the message across that the GOP is an active drag on American prospects in one speech. You make that message real over and over again — and Weiner here materially advances that effort. IMHO, of course.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Alex S.:
I agree with this. I’m not optimistic about November, but the only people paying attention at this point are political junkies. If the polls haven’t shifted significantly by late September, I’ll be very surprised
Tom Hilton
@scav:
No, but it does make it necessary to ask oneself: do I think this is effective because careful, dispassionate analysis shows it to be effective, or because it’s what I want to see? Because it’s human nature to confuse the two.
BombIranForChrist
In the short term, you’re pretty much right on the money, as far as I’m concerned.
In the longer term, I can only hope that maybe this will be one additional iota that may one day turn into a nuance that one day may turn into a movement that will encourage Democrats to be more passionate about what they allegedly believe in.
But like you said, or to paraphrase what you said, I would also like to grow wings and turn invisible and drive around in a hover craft and eat jars of peanut butter without getting fat. Sweet, sweet peanut butter.
DougJ
@Jim C:
You’re right. Can you call a Senator a “member of Congress”? What’s a word that describes both?
mclaren
Anytime someone gets passionate and committed, some fool calls it a “rant.” So Abraham Lincoln had a rant about abolition. And Patrick Henry had a rant about liberty. And FDR ranted about fear.
Brain damage seems to have taken hold. You people don’t know what a rant is. Ranting is incoherent hysterical gibberish. That’s what Republicans do. When a Democrat calls the repubs on their bullshit, that’s a long-overdue smackdown, not a rant.
True. Democrats share some of the blame for the blown-up world economy, though, because let’s recall who worked hard to repeal the Glass-Steagall act..Bill Clinton. Remember him? And let’s recall who argued vehemently that the government didn’t need to up capital requirements for hedge funds or banks when they engaged in risky investments. Robert Rubin? Larry Summers? Remember them?
Democrats all. It took bipartisan support to trash the world economy. Republicans finally set off the bomb that blew up America’s finances, but the Democrats worked hard to stack up the mile-high mountain of powderkegs like the Glass-Steagall repeal that made it possible for that bomb to set off a chain reaction that took down the entire global economy.
Moreover, today we’re see a lot of Democrats mindlessly chanting the brain-dead mantra that we need to fight inflation, when the real problem is looming deflation. What we actually need right now is another stimulus package, not deficit cutting. Fools like Tim Geithner and ignorant clowns like Ben Bernanke (guess who reappointed that moron? Obama!) are responsible for this blunder too, and it’s happening right now.
Paul in KY
I don’t see why we can’t do both: Calmly repeat over & over that the Republicans are playing politics with people’s lives, etc. & then when the situation demands: Unload a can of Weinerass ™ on them.
Something Fabulous
@DougJ: I disagree, actually– they’re all “Congresspersons.” Perfectly acceptable use.
CalD
Greg Sargent seems to have developed a bit or a penchant for paroxysms of poutrage lately (just call me Spiro Agnew). I’ve been a pretty big fan of his work for years but I’m starting to fear Blanche Lincoln’s primary win may have done to him what John Kerry sewing up the Democratic nomination did to Mickey Kaus in ’04. Either that or he may not be getting enough B vitamins.
But whatever the cause, seems like pretty much everything he writes lately could be filed under the category of, How have Democrats failed you today? I’m half expecting to see him start guest posting on FireDogLake about any day now.
IndieTarheel
@Brachiator:
Cut, print, and wrap.