On January 23, Raw Story published a speech by John Edwards in which he used extremely bellicose language to describe Iran. It was a shocking display of ignorance on the part of Edwards, and the conference itself was composed of neoconservative hawks itching for action against Iran. Steve Clemons dubbed it a 'war party'. Supporters of Edwards, of which I considered myself one until that moment, had a real awakening as to whether he had genuinely learned lessons from his war vote in Iraq.
Over the next few weeks, progressives picked up the speech, and confronted Edwards in various venues, including the blogs and the American Prospect. He was also accosted by supporters, staffers, and advisors, all of whom found themselves with the same level of pause. He has walked back his rhetoric, for which he deserves credit (and a bit of scorn). And then on Meet the Press, according to Digby, John Edwards performed admirably.
This is some powerful stuff. I have always had suspicions of John Edwards, but it doesn't really matter if any of us trust him on a personal level. The issue is what are the structural constraints upon someone's behavior. And now Edwards, because of the blogs and new media outlets like Raw Story, will be confronted with his Iran comments repeatedly, and walked back against hawkishness. These constraints will apply to any candidate, and it's going to be interesting to watch as the public begins to feel its oats around its newly empowered state.
One of the most interesting conversations I had last week at the DNC meeting was with a high-level DNC officer. We talked about the process that elected Dean to Chairman and what would happen if a Democrat won in 2008. Traditionally, when a Democrat is in the White House, that person selects the party chair, and the DNC members ratify the President's choice. We talked about whether this tradition would hold in the face of a new set of dynamic DNC members and state party chairs that believe in the party as an institution rather than as a vehicle for Presidential personalities. Will the next Chair would be selected by a Democratic President, or will the DNC members keep the power they've gained over the past four years?
In fact, the DNC was been a moribund democratic structure until 2001, when there was a democratic challenge to the sitting Secretary. Prior to that, there had been no contested elections. In 2005, there were contested elections up and down the ticket, from the Chairman to the six Vice Chair positions. I watched a few years ago as Mike Honda beat Alvaro Cifuentes for the Vice-Chair, as Harold Ickes was counting votes in the aisle of the Washington Hilton, and it was all blogged.
And now the Executive Committee, which is the governing body of the group, is getting used to voting and wielding power, even against the wishes of Chairman Dean (who lost some resolutions last weekend) This isn't an isolated pattern - college Democrats are seeing contested elections, and Young Democrats just saw some very aggressive conventioneering to shut out progressives in Michigan, with dishonorable credential fights from party machine people reminiscent of an earlier age. The Connecticut Democratic Party convention in 2006 was a key part of the Lamont campaigns insurgent challenge to Lieberman. The bonds that are being created in these fights are not going away, but are strengthening the party. Blogs are bringing these processes to anyone who wants them, which is allowing college students to create and execute field plans without the fear that politics is some mystical profession.
So what we saw with Edwards, a brutal assault on his credibility after he kowtowed to AIPAC, was not an isolated pattern. It's what happens when progressives get organized and work to beat back corrupted ideas that flourish in secret. It's what happens when we genuinely listen to Howard Dean and take power for ourselves. We should consider this in 2008, as we move forward. Debate makes our party and our country stronger. Let's not pretend that positivity is a good thing - criticism walked Edwards back from insane rhetoric on Iran. If we can figure out the funding and racial bridges, it can do a whole lot more when the next President takes office.
|
|
|
Permalink :: 63 Comments :: Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.
