Decision ‘08

The Nutroots® Manifesto

The following is a summation of the exciting new bestseller, Crushing The Hedge: Nutroots®, Nutmeg, and Other Spicy Political Diversions:

1. It’s All About the Winning

“They want to make me into the latest Jesse Jackson, but I’m not ideological at all,” Moulitsas told me, “I’m just all about winning.” - Washington Monthly, January/February ‘06

Combined record of political wins by Netroots candidates - 0 for 19

2. If you don’t understand how losing is all about the winning, that just means you’re not a master strategist yet.

Despite the fact that Markos has nothing to recommend himself as an authority on anything except making money off of blogs, he is continually given the ‘brown-nose special’ by prominent Democratic politicians and mainstream publications like Newsweek.

3. We are independent of special interests.

Netroots advocates love to pose as outsiders, even as they live off the proverbial teat of liberal special interest groups. Jerome Armstrong of MyDD is associated with the Mark Warner campaign. Markos Moulitsas Zuniga famously was a Howard Dean shill. Duncan (Atrios, aka ‘Open Thread’) Black gets his mortgage money from the George Soros-funded Media Matters. When a Nutroots® player talks of special interests, invariably he means the other guy’s…

4. We really, really hate Joe Lieberman.

Most Americans look at Joe Lieberman, and they see a fundamentally decent man who is one of the few honorable politicians of either party. Not so the Nutroots® - they look at Lieberman and see…well, let’s hear it from the Nutroots® leaders themselves.

Kos I: We hate Lieberman. Lieberman is going to get a primary challenger for his Senate seat next year if me and a lot of grass-roots groups have our way.

Kos II:Need to bash Democrats on any particular issue? Call Joe Lieberman! He has no concept of party loyalty and will happily blaze away.

Matt Stoller, MyDD: Lieberman has no principle, no vision, and no ability to lead this country in the right direction. He’s with us when it doesn’t matter, and he’s against us when it does.

Atrios: Open Thread.

5. We’re not ideological. Oh, no, not at all…but we still hate the DLC and TNR.

“Senator Reid’s popularity in the netroots, despite being a moderate-to-conservative Democrat, is proof that we aren’t about ideology,” said Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas. “Rather, we rally around leaders who aren’t afraid of their own shadows, aren’t afraid of their convictions, and aren’t afraid to take the battle to the corrupt neocons, theocons, and corporate cons who are misgoverning our country.” Press Release, 01/03/06

Yet despite Markos’s constant refrain about how it’s not ideology, it’s winning (see number 1), the two most prominent sources for centrist Democratic ideas that are actually capable of supporting a win are routinely castigated by Kos and his ilk.

Here’s Kos on the DLC: I hesitate to write about the DLC much, since writing about the idiots at that organizations boosts their relevance at a time when their influence is waning within the party establishment.

But since Atrios and Josh are taking shots, it’s as good a time as any to pile on. Especially since both Duncan and Josh accurately pinpoint the problems with the DLC. It’s not the ideology. It’s their “my way or the highway” arrogance. [This last bit is a particularly galling statement, considering its source.]

Now Atrios:…[I]nside the beltway democrats who count among their friends plenty of DLC types and have serious discussions about policies and strategy and whatnot probably perceive this as a serious debate about the direction of the Democratic party in terms of its policies, but the rest of us just see the DLC as a bunch of smug bratty a**holes who pop up every few weeks to write nasty polemics against everyone who doesn’t agree with them. [Again, a serious case of pot/kettle syndrome].

Their treatment of The New Republic, the most centrist of the Democratic publications, is more of the same.

________________________________________________

If you’re confused about the supposed message of this movement, that’s because there is no message. It’s non-ideological, except when it’s about ideology. It’s all about winning, and it never wins. The concept of the netroots is a snake-oil pitch; Markos and Jerome and Duncan have a vested interest in presenting their work as something magic and wonderful that will change The Way Things Work…but the reality is that the netroots is a bunch of old concepts dressed up with new technology. Direct mail, retail politics, and union organizing brought into the Internet age…important, yes, for fundraising…but revolutionary? Hardly…

UPDATE 10:59 a.m.: Thanks to Charles at Little Green Footballs for the link…

UPDATE 2 6:27 p.m.: Many thanks to Dean Barnett for the kind words, and I must highlight the following:

In case you’re not going to follow the link, you should know that he renames the “netroots” the “nutroots.” I think there’s every reason to believe this term could be in wide use by the end of the year.

I hope so, Dean - that’s why I’ve been using the term so often and putting that little symbol at the end…I want to be known as the guy who named the Nutroots®…

16 Responses to “The Nutroots® Manifesto”

1 Abdullah al-Libi Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 12:44 pm
If Daily “Screw Them” KKKos really cared about winning, he would have supported a Lieberman nomination in 2004 instead of a fool who thinks a “kinder, gentler war on terror” is the way to stop Islamist totalitarians.
2 Fausta Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 1:14 pm
I’d add another item to the list
3 Dennis Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 2:31 pm
I’ve been banging away on this topic for a while, especially Kos’ confusion as to what the heck he stands for (aside from being against President Bush), but I never could have come up with something as slyly eviscerating as your “Open Thread” comment, Mark.
4 Mark Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 3:11 pm
Hey, glad you liked it! I gave myself a little chuckle with that one…always sad when you laugh at your own jokes…
5 PMain Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 3:30 pm
Remember the good ole’ day when political bosses at least tried to remain in the background? These clowns simply wish to become clearing-houses of finance & votes for hire & to simply establish themselves as players w/ political pull. The Democratic Party is welcome to them & their ilk. Sure they can generate web traffic, possibly some quick cash & a lot of attention, but then again so can Anna Nicole Smith. Just like ANS, they are all flash & no substance & it shows in their efforts & support in political campaigns & formulation of a coherent message – or lack there of. The only reason they are still around is that Democratic politicians by nature, like children are inherently sensitive to loud noises & numbers, they just haven’t learned to differentiate between noise & genuine political concern just yet. Once the next generation of Internet savvy politicians enter the political fray, I’d imagine that whatever perceived political power or influence that Democrat politicians believe these gentlemen to hold, will diminish or be shown for what it is & for who they are, a bunch of college kids being supported by their parents or 60’s Liberal kooks who are all talk & no action favoring one pet cause or another. The only sustained unifying characteristic is their apparent hatred for the Right, more specifically George W. Bush. What kind of movement is so defined by their enemies solely & doesn’t that just show why they haven’t been able to gain any real political ground, despite Bush’s shrinking approval numbers?
6 Muffin the Cat Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 7:16 pm
What I find interesting about his group of people is that they really feel they are in the political mainstream and cannot understand why nobody in reasonable political circles wants anything to do with them. They have no understanding or respect of anyone else’s viewpoints even other Democrats and they have no ability to think outside their tiny little minds. They are the most bigoted and hateful individuals that I have run across in the last 20 or so years. Bigots are present in all groups including race, gender, ethnicity, religious, and political. Especially politically and these people fit the definition perfectly.

Another interesting aspect of the far left is that they have basically turned into their parents. These are remnants of the people that protested against the establishment as I was growing up in the ’60’s. They complained about how closed minded, bigoted, and resistive to change the establishment (mostly Republicans) was at that time. They are now no different with the exception that they are now on the opposite side of the political spectrum (mostly Democrats). From a true definition, they are ultra conservatives. They refuse to change. They are far from the true meaning of liberal.

They do not understand compromise and have no understanding that a senator must be able to appeal to a majority of the populace within a state to get elected and that means having mostly centrist type viewpoints depending on the state. A representative can get elected with either far right or far left viewpoints depending on their district.

Their record of 0-19 says it all.
7 Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » I Need A New Punch Line Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 7:41 pm
[…] You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your ownsite. […]
8 dmac Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 9:05 pm
Muffin, it was best exemplified by the late film critic from The New Yorker (Pauline Kael), who said after Nixon’s second term win, “how did Nixon win? I didn’t know anybody who voted for him!”

Some folks live quite comfortably within their own bubbles.
9 The Politburo Diktat » Blog Archive » The Nutroots® Manifesto Says:
March 16th, 2006 at 9:50 pm
[…] Decision ‘08 » The Nutroots® Manifesto […]
10 Otto Says:
March 17th, 2006 at 2:08 pm
dmac,
Most people live comfortably within their own bubble. While having lunch in a rather glossy country club in 1992 the subject of Clinton’s surge in the polls came up and one blue rinsed lady with big hair and even bigger jewellry said ”I don’t know anyone who is going to vote for him.” No she probably didn’t.
11 Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » The Real Nutroots® Manifesto Says:
March 17th, 2006 at 9:48 pm
[…] Unlike me, Dean Barnett actually went to the trouble of reading Crushing the Hedge, and he reviews it in this piece at the Weekly Standard. Barnett is not without praise; he finds the book to be well-crafted and candid, but ultimately empty: …The most disturbing question raised by Crashing the Gate is if progressives don’t know what they’re fighting for, then why are they fighting so hard? […]
12 Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Clift Diving Says:
March 18th, 2006 at 1:59 pm
[…] It’s brilliant strategy for him, a dark horse presidential candidate carving out a niche to the left of Hillary Clinton. The junior senator from New York is under attack for being too soft on Bush and the war, and most of the non-Hillarys are to her right. There is a vacuum in the heart of the party’s base that Feingold fills, but at what cost? His censure proposal looks like a stunt, “the equivalent of calling for a filibuster from Davos,” says Marshall Wittmann, a senior fellow with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council. To win in ’06, he says, “Democrats need to take the Hippocratic Oath: first, do no harm.” Oooohhh, that’s going cost the DLC support among the Nutroots®! (long pause for punchline to sink in, then a double-take in sync with the drummer’s rim shot) - Thank you very much! Good night!… […]
13 Toby Petzold Says:
March 19th, 2006 at 10:41 pm
As a matter of fact, Duncan Black is not running an open thread on the issue of hating Joe Lieberman. I used to ask him (through his lickspittles) why he constantly referred to Lieberman as “Holy Joe.” Was it a slam at Lieberman as an observant Jew?

I feel certain that it was. Black may not use that particular epithet anymore towards “neo-cons” like Lieberman, but he certainly tolerates a lot of left-handed remarks about their actions in his comment threads.
14 Bilbray Wins House Race in Calif. at The Politburo Diktat Says:
June 7th, 2006 at 6:48 am
[…] I’ll be checking the Nutroots® sources (and Mark Coffey), for reports of irrelevance, moral victories, and fraud. […]
15 This ain’t Hell… » Levin finally admits Democrats are clueless in Iraq Says:
April 9th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
[…] So they’re trying the old strategy that worked for them in 1995 budget battle - blame their opponents with the help of their willing accomplices in the media. But, I think it’ll backfire this time - just because the nutroots have already shown us that their party, that MoveOn claims to have bought and paid for, is the party that can’t support the troops. […]
16 Topsecretk9 Says:
September 13th, 2007 at 11:30 am
I wold quibble with one thing — you totally left out the dogswmp’s Joe Lieberman hate. I would argue that razor blades for breakfast Jane really started the whole “Rape Gurney We HATE Joe” campaign — or at least was most visceral (Hamsher’s racist black face image?) I just think that firdogswamp rates a special hate distinction at least on that issue (I personally think every issue)