The sudden and tragic eclipse of Paul Hackett
I apologize for writing more opinion today than I like to do, but there have been a couple of issues this week that call for it. First was Cheney's shooting incident, but that's just another referendum on a press corps more interested in blood 'n guts than the future of the republic.
The other story, one which wasn't the source of any punchlines on the left, was the apparent disappearance of Ohio veteran Paul Hackett from the political scene. At least for the time being.
There are two things about this story that turn my stomach. It starts with Joe Lieberman (who I haven't picked on here except for his ineptitude in dealing with the media) claiming this week-- on Sean Hannity's show, no less-- that the Democratic party has been taken over by the 'far left.' And progressive bloggers are equated with the far left by the MSM. Liberal bloggers know this to be bullshit, but the story of Paul Hackett really drives the point home. From all accounts, he was "soft-pressured" (I just coined that term, thanks) to leave a Senate race for which he had been actively recruited.
He had been outraised by the more seasoned Democratic contender Sherrod Brown. But although not even Air America hosts can pronounce Sherrod Brown's name correctly, Paul Hackett managed to become a national figure after one hotly-contested congressional race in which he almost pulled off a colossal upset. Nevertheless, (and this would tentatively seem to support Lieberman's statement), Brown is further to the left than Hackett in a state that has fallen completely under the sway of neo-fascist Bushies. Huh?
Hackett became a darling of the blogs and the netroots for a very simple reason: he was sincere, honest, and a straight-talker. My best estimation of the establishment's discomfiture with Hackett is that he was a 'loose cannon.' In short, he was too much of a straight talker. And the establishment has decided that it's better to go with a more sedate candidate.
Maybe the corruption in Ohio's GOP has gotten so serious that not even an unpopular Republican can win against a solid Democrat. And maybe that represents a great opportunity to "sneak" a very progressive senatorial candidate through the elections this fall. An end run, if you will.
This begs the question-- why didn't the "radical" blogosphere fall in line behind the more liberal Brown? Simply put, it's because the blogosphere, contrary to what even the ostensibly progressive New Republic claimed this week, isn't populated by rabid lefites. What we're looking for is fighters and leaders. People who, without doing all the political calculus first, will come out and say "Alito is an extremist, and he isn't fit to sit on the Supreme Court." High-profile Democrats who are willing to say "This administration is breaking the law, and no American is above the law." People who took up arms when the nation called, but aren't afraid to say, "The government is treating American soldiers like expendable cattle, when they deserve to be honored and respected for their willingness to risk their lives for our way of life."
The shoddy treatment of Paul Hackett by the Democratic party is a shameful insight into the mindset of appeasement and political triangulation that, sadly, still seems to dominate this party. Even in the face of an executive and legislative branch who have spent five years looting the national treasury and sending young American to their deaths in the name of some undefined ideology that offers no explanations but demands total obedience.
The other story, one which wasn't the source of any punchlines on the left, was the apparent disappearance of Ohio veteran Paul Hackett from the political scene. At least for the time being.
There are two things about this story that turn my stomach. It starts with Joe Lieberman (who I haven't picked on here except for his ineptitude in dealing with the media) claiming this week-- on Sean Hannity's show, no less-- that the Democratic party has been taken over by the 'far left.' And progressive bloggers are equated with the far left by the MSM. Liberal bloggers know this to be bullshit, but the story of Paul Hackett really drives the point home. From all accounts, he was "soft-pressured" (I just coined that term, thanks) to leave a Senate race for which he had been actively recruited.
He had been outraised by the more seasoned Democratic contender Sherrod Brown. But although not even Air America hosts can pronounce Sherrod Brown's name correctly, Paul Hackett managed to become a national figure after one hotly-contested congressional race in which he almost pulled off a colossal upset. Nevertheless, (and this would tentatively seem to support Lieberman's statement), Brown is further to the left than Hackett in a state that has fallen completely under the sway of neo-fascist Bushies. Huh?
Hackett became a darling of the blogs and the netroots for a very simple reason: he was sincere, honest, and a straight-talker. My best estimation of the establishment's discomfiture with Hackett is that he was a 'loose cannon.' In short, he was too much of a straight talker. And the establishment has decided that it's better to go with a more sedate candidate.
Maybe the corruption in Ohio's GOP has gotten so serious that not even an unpopular Republican can win against a solid Democrat. And maybe that represents a great opportunity to "sneak" a very progressive senatorial candidate through the elections this fall. An end run, if you will.
This begs the question-- why didn't the "radical" blogosphere fall in line behind the more liberal Brown? Simply put, it's because the blogosphere, contrary to what even the ostensibly progressive New Republic claimed this week, isn't populated by rabid lefites. What we're looking for is fighters and leaders. People who, without doing all the political calculus first, will come out and say "Alito is an extremist, and he isn't fit to sit on the Supreme Court." High-profile Democrats who are willing to say "This administration is breaking the law, and no American is above the law." People who took up arms when the nation called, but aren't afraid to say, "The government is treating American soldiers like expendable cattle, when they deserve to be honored and respected for their willingness to risk their lives for our way of life."
The shoddy treatment of Paul Hackett by the Democratic party is a shameful insight into the mindset of appeasement and political triangulation that, sadly, still seems to dominate this party. Even in the face of an executive and legislative branch who have spent five years looting the national treasury and sending young American to their deaths in the name of some undefined ideology that offers no explanations but demands total obedience.
posted by Matt Sandwich | 10:54 PM
<< Home