Washblog

How has debate been muzzled in the slightest?  Mark Wilson ran against Maria Cantwell of 16 months, then quits, and you blame him for muzzling debate?

If you're looking for places to throw your vote away, there's always Hong Tran, and after the primary, Aaron Dixon and that libertarian guy, Arlo Guthrie (I know, not his name, but who gives a shit anyway?).

Also, I think Senator Cantwell has been reaching out to some GOP folks or otherwise conservative people.  She met recently with some Iraq war widows who's ideology is the opposite of Ms. Luger's.  Cantwell sat down with these "stay the course" folks while casting a vote (the Levin amendment) that says it's time to get going out of Iraq.  Cantwell may have issues with folks on the left, but she'll have no problem getting crossover votes.

by Belltowner on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 01:03:02 PM PST

---

Your assumptions ring completely (okay, mostly) false.  First of all, Mark Wilson (and Hong Tran or Aaron Dixon) are not spoilers, they were/are candidates.  If you choose to support one of them with your vote, time and money, then by all means do what you think is best.  But to pretend that our next Senator won't be Maria Cantwell or Mike McGavik is naive, and many will adjust their support accordingly by who can actually win.  That doesn't mean they've been forced into the party line, it means they'll prefer a Senator they agree with 90% of the time over one they'll agree with 20%.

Reaching Republicans isn't treated as futile - Rodney Tom in the 48th LD is a great example of a smart, sensible Republican who realized his party has abandoned his beliefs and moved to the side that respresents his views.  And I think this year you'll see a lot of people who consider themselves Republicans to switch over, especially for Darcy Burner in the 8th CD.

Seriously, if you're looking for "hippocritical characterization of it as disloyalty or dissent", then check out Dick Cheney's Iraq speeches, not those of Maria Cantwell and her supporters.  And if you think true debate has been muzzled, then I'd recommend you look at the last year of postings here on Washblog, or at your local LD meeting.

It seems clear that debate is doing just fine, even if the majority come to different conclusions than you, and maybe for different reasons.

by sean baratt on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 01:03:09 PM PST

---

I'm having trouble keepin' up with ya. How about citing some sources for this stuff.

Specifically:

• Who says; 'the left' and Democrats are the same thing?
• Who says; "the lefties have no choice but to fall into Democratic fold".?
• Who says; "To reach Republicans is futile"?
• Who is; browbeating "our own" into towing the party line?
• Who is trying to; "muzzle true debate,through hypocritical characterization of it as disloyalty or dissent"?

I know Mark was preparing to end his campaign because of lack of support... too few people were willing to put their money where there mouths were.

I've heard and read a lot of personal opinions about the candidacy of Mark Wilson and Hong Tran. But I haven't seen anything I'd call official Democratic Party pronouncements about muzzling debate or forcing anybody back into the fold.

by citizensteve on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 02:03:46 PM PST

---

 1) My data..data...it's somewhere around here... I see no function for footnotes. Let's call it experiencial.  I saw it as a foregone fact that a large source of contention between the Green and Democratic Parties has been the "spoiler" factor, otherwise interpreted as an assumption that those on the further left (the Greens) would have voted for Democrats, had there not been high profile alternatives.
  2) Mark Wilson was a frontrunner among other candidates, but one must decide whether more than 2 candidates is a spoiling or an expansion of choices.  I would like to think the latter, but there seems to be some difference of opinion.

 3)Maria Cantwell voted for the Iraq War and if that is something millions of civilians in Iraq can die in hopes of ending, can we not find a decent representative that would have voted against it?  This is but one large flaw with electing Cantwell, though I do not doubt that it will happen.

  4) I still hold fast on the idea that, though members or supporters do quite a lot of discussing, the Demogratic party is doing some muzzling. I would like to hear thoughts as to what type of debate is the most helpful.  Is it that among ourselves on blogs and such; or that among representatives leading to well-honed legislation? Are they the same? Dare I say we indulge in a bit of digital self-pleasuring if it does not result in candidates that will publicly do the same? (I'm not sure that came out completely right.)

by Christian Oliver on Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 02:36:42 PM PST

---

Thanks for coming here to post this, Christian --  I hope you come back and post more.  And do please use more Shakespearean-type retorts like the arrow thing, especially when communicating with Belltowner.  The combo of your response and then his was one of the loveliest laughs I've had on the Internet for awhile.

We must "reach" Republicans -- and reach across regional lines.  The problems/challenges we face are whole-system problems.  As Jay Inlsee said in relation to our energy/climate change problems last weekend at an event I wrote about here on Washblog -- 'Everyone is going to have to participate.  Everyone has to get on the bus.  It is the fair and patriotic thing to do.  All citizens must be engaged in this effort.'

The thing I don't agree on with you (with you on?) is the severity of the browbeating/muzzling.  I have felt peer pressure -- but not from the Dem. party.  I'm speaking from the local level - I'm a PCO (precinct committee officer) and member of the local District Democratic executive board.  I've felt no judgement for my opinions or pressure to carry Cantwell literature, etc.

Obviously (to me), there's been strategizing on getting Cantwell an early endorsement.  Wilson has not had access to speaking at all the LDs, etc.  Perhaps that's muzzling, but I think of it more as the kind of strategizing that an organization will do.  

Your essential point in this second item, though, I think may have been overlooked in this thread.  I agree, I agree, I agree.  

by noemie maxwell on Wed Jul 19, 2006 at 09:04:28 AM PST

---