Filibuster and Alito: How the White House spun the Filibuster

[ For your convenience, there is backup analysis, research, and assessments in the NSA Hearing Support focus area; Click here to read other content in the NSA Hearing Support focus area.]

* * *

Introduction: Analyzing the White House Diversion

We judge there is a White House effort to divert attention from the core issue -- unlawful conduct -- and focus on speculative "risks to DNC" if "nothing is found." We see the trend occurring here. Notice they are towing Rove's line: Over what the 2006 election is or isn't about.



The statutes were clear. he White House knew about the law, created the system to accomplish this. It doesn't matter if civil liberties are violated -- that is a separate issue. The FISA Court looks only at what the standard is -- what the White House/DoJ does before the courts -- and what the White House actually did -- whether that conduct is or is not consistent with the law.

The diversion is obvious. Rather than embrace the FISA violation and say, "We are wrong," the RNC is shifting the issue to "whether there is an irrelevant event that does or does not happen." This is the same issue with Iran, Iraq WMD, and Patriot Act. Rather than focus on the evidence, the White House points to speculative mushroom clouds on issues -- that aren't really there -- to get people to move today. This is similar to what Powell's briefing before the UN was all about: Nothing about facts, simply about creating an image to force the debate.

Where have we seen this recently? The Filibuster issue. What follows is a breakdown of how the RNC-White House did this.

* * *

Framing: This is unlawful government domestic spying program.

RNC and WHite House use the following types of terms to change the issue:

al-Qaeda-tapping program

anti-terror program

* * *

One approach the White House takes to issues is simple. Rather than discuss the merits of an approach, it simple asserts that the approach is extreme.

The purpose of this information is to illustrate how the White House and public affairs and private contractors are using open media to dissuade action.

This information and analysis will be useful in assessing future White House responses.

Key indicator: emotional argument contained no spelling errors. That is a sign of an orchestrated disinformation, "effort to dissuade". We judge the President's rebellion has infected the DNC.


Warning: We make no claim that anyone listed by name has committed any crime. They are honorable people. If your attorney wishes to discuss this further, we are fully prepared to litigate for harassment. You shall lose. If you have a comment on this piece, you have one option: To blog about it. Other than that, the text and "fair comment" remains on the web. If you or your attorneys continue to harass, we shall be forced to file an injunction. This is your last warning.

* * *

Discussion

Let's being with an analysis of the White House statements.

For purpose of references, the full, unedited version of the comments are located below in the Yellow Box.

* * *

What the White House did to affect the DNC Senators was to portray the filibuster as a failure before discussing the issues. This is another way of saying, "Rather than face the prospect of an open discussion, the White House hoped to deny the DNC the platform."

They did this in several ways. First, they threatened to remove the filibuster as a rule. Second, they hoped to discredit the filibuster itself. Both are issues which should have been discussed during open debate.

* * *

Let's being with a line-by line analysis of the statements. Within a couple of minutes, it will be easy for you to see the curious approach.

The White House and Joint Staff use similar planning documents. They are well versed in propaganda. The information below outlines how this domestic propaganda was aimed directly at the US Senate. Also, you’ll want to keep this in mind as you prepare for the conviction phase: How will we ensure that the Senators are given reliable information to make informed votes.

* * *

[This is in work; there will be updates]

Format: Commentary [Original text]

1. Notice the title, it asserts without proof the filibuster is an illusion. This is a faulty premise. Moreover, by "taking no action" there is no need to "bust" anything. [Text: Busting the Filibuster Fantasy]

2. Notice the "I heard" allusion. This is without reference. This is not unusual. The way the Joint Staff and DoD placed articles in Iraq was using similar non-attributed sources. [When I heard]

3. This line is curious. Notice several words, "actually" "foolhardy" and "nomination." Let's start with the last one. The "nomination" is not correct. The Constitution in Article II Section 2 says that the Senate has the inherent authority to check the president’s power; and that the advice-consent is linked with the appointment. Thus, the author has no knowledge of the Constitution or senate rules. Had they known the Appointment process, they would have correctly referred to the Appointment as it is correctly labeled.

The point is that the writer is already starting with an incorrect baseline with which to debate. Also not that the tone of the language is very condescending in that "they actually were going to do this". In fact, filibusters do offer an excellent opportunity to discuss things. [ that the Senate Democrats were actually heeding John Kerry's foolhardy call for a filibuster of the Alito nomination]

4 One sign of a problem is, this early in a discussion, when the author asserts a position is not logical, but has failed to make the case they are doing otherwise [-- now known as the yodel heard round the world -- I felt I should write something on this logic-defying move.]

5. To be clear, the correct reference should have been to "speak". It is curious that the word "yodel" was used, which would suggest some sort of European connection, which is intended. The objective of the word is to create in the readers' mind an idea of someone in shorts, and of non-American origin. This does two things: It links the readers' mind with Kerry's trip to Europe -- and creates the illusion that Kerry is in some sort of alliance with non-Americans. However, we see and have no evidence that Kerry is in rebellion; rather, it is the President who is doing so.

6. More of the "my friend Sam," kind of arguments. This is part of the set-up. [Then my friend Micah Sifry forwarded me a bluntly-worded critique of the filibuster strategy by Matt Stoller at MyDD, one of the nation's leading liberal blogs.]

7. Notice the emphatic statements asserting a status, but failing to explore the other view: There is a good reason to have an extended debate. [Stoller's cogent, cold-eyed analysis aptly summed up my feelings about the folly of this move -- and did so with far more credibility than I ever could, given his unquestionable progressive credentials.]

8. Sharing. This is a strategy to offer something as a gift. In fact, it’s a Trojan horse. [So instead of essentially saying ditto for several graphs, I thought it would be best to just share with you the entirety of Stoller's post.]

9. Assertion. This does what rove does -- frames the issue not in terms of the DNC strategy -- to apply the lessons of Iraq WMD and Patriot Act, but to imply that any effort isn't worth it. however, the objective isn't to stop Alto, but to simply call attention to the matter, and use the time to debate. [YOU DON'T GET POINTS FOR TRYING]

10. Preparing audience for uncomfortable arguments. This is gift number 2, another Trojan horse. [I'm going to get a lot of flack for this post, but here goes.]

11. Notice word, "extreme" [A filibuster is an extreme action]

12. Links to false requirement: There is no requirement the public support or agree with the Senate. We find no textual reference to justify confidence [that requires robust public support.]

13. Irrelevance. [ We do not have this support.]

14. Over simplification, [It's that simple.]

15. False position [I'm all for keeping Alito off the court, and a filibuster until after the SOTU is a good idea. ]

16. If it’s a waste of time why explaining it to stupid people? Answer: The audience is actually threaten the President's power by defying the rubber stamp. [ But it's very important for the netroots to understand
what's happening here.]

17. The effort is well under way [This last-minute campaign]

18. False premise -- RNC realizes that their assumptions were not locked in; the world woke up. Kerry made an impact. RNC is losing. [ to get Senators to switch their votes,

19. [after it became crystal clear that we do not have the votes to filibuster, is a classic example of 'get points for trying' politics.

20. Gobbly goop. [It's a way for Senators to get credit from the left-wing of the party without having to actually do anything or stop anything.]

21. False premise [The reality is that this fight was lost two months ago,]

22. Irrelevancies, just like the efforts to shut down the Iraq WMD debate -- the list is long -- did I say irrelevant? [ when Senators decided that going on Christmas break was more important than preparing to defend the constitution, and PFAW and Alliance for Justice decided that releasing 150 page documents was a good way to build public pressure against Alito's confirmation.

23. False support [By all means, call your Senators. Don't stop. Don't let up.]

24. Mushroom clouds of doom, undermining support for DNC. [ But don't forgive the party leadership and our groups for this travesty. ]

25. Imply problem [People for the American Way has been preparing for this fight for years.]

26. False image of alliance falling apparent [And then they didn't show up.]

27. Irrelevant [The same is true with NARAL, and the Alliance for Justice.]

28. Whatever [ I honestly don't know why they are funded anymore]

29. Irrelevant comparison [ - that's how bad this failure has been.]

And Senators - including DiFi, HRC, Kerry, and Obama - have revealed themselves to be
craven fair weather fans who expect others to do the work of standing
up for Democratic values for them.

31. Illogical request [Think about it for a moment.]

32. Irrelevant, false [ John Kerry called for a filibuster from Switzerland two hours after it became public that there were not enough votes for a filibuster. ]

33. No basis for assessment [That is atrocious.]

34. Irrelevant citation/authority [Tinman points out on Breaking Blue the essential point:]


35. Phone calls are possible [If he was serious about it he would have stayed in Washington, held press conferences, lobbied his colleagues and tried to generate as
much attention as possible.]

36. False Assertion, circular reasoning [Since it was just a PR stunt, it wasn't
necessary for Kerry to change his travel plans.]

37. False assertion [Democratic insiders have failed at the art of politics.]

38. Repetition [ It's that simple.]

39. Failed argument -- redefining the "solution" in terms that are good for the RNC to attack, not what is real. Same thing as with Iraq and Iran and Syria [ Doing politics is not about saying the right thing at the wrong time, it's about lining up a coalition to push the levers of social change.]

40. No evidence [This they just don't do.]

42. Irrelevant point [ For instance, at no point has any insider poll or group leader laid out a strategy for victory. ]

43. Irrelevant [No one defined victory.]

44. Irrelevant [ No one laid out a path to get there.]

45. False And no one communicated with various groups, including the netroots, on
helping us be part of a coalition to win.]

46. False premise [The communications operation here is just atrocious.]

47. Irrelevant [The insider groups have young communications staffers dealing with bloggers who collectively talk to 1 million people a day.]

48. False favorable comment [These are talented people, but they aren't
setting strategy and they don't have the juice to help us with this fight.]

49. Absurd [And don't delude yourself, this is intentional.]

50. US vs. Them [The attitude that the insiders have towards us is that]

51. Victim, possibly true [we are a stupid ATM set up to feed their ineffectiveness.]

52. Irrelevant [Witness uberinsider telling us the truth about where we fit in:]

53. Irrelevant reference to lobbyist -- they don't like being ignored, boo hoo ["The bloggers and online donors represent an important resource for the party, but they are not representative of the majority you need to win elections," said Steve Elmendorf, a Democratic lobbyist who advised Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign. "The trick will be to harness their energy and their money without looking like you are a captive of the activist left."]

53. Victim [They are telling us, broadcasting to us, that they think we're
stupid.]

54. Senate took the bait, and showed us they are ineffective -- the States are read [They think that having no campaign on Alito can easily be fixed by posting a diary on Daily Kos urging us to 'fight' a month after the fight has already been lost. It's craven, it's crass, it's ridiculous.]

55. Denial [Even so, with no direction and no communication, we've moved the vote
count on the filibuster to 37 from the high 20s.]

56. False celebration [That's amazing. But don't forget, they let us down, big time. And we should not forgive them for this, until Alito is off the court.]

57. Hollow threat. [Because Alito and the brutal decisions he will hand down is a reminder of the insiders' desire for direct mail success over preserving the republic.]

Problems

No solutions, no action plan, and no back-up plan.

Well, now we know how the RNC looks at life.

* * *

Original comments linked to the RNC disinformation effort.

Busting the Filibuster Fantasy

When I heard that the Senate Democrats were actually heeding John Kerry's foolhardy call for a filibuster of the Alito nomination -- now known as the yodel heard round the world -- I felt I should write something on this logic-defying move.

Then my friend Micah Sifry forwarded me a bluntly-worded critique of the filibuster strategy by Matt Stoller at MyDD, one of the nation's leading liberal blogs. Stoller's cogent, cold-eyed analysis aptly summed up my feelings about the folly of this move -- and did so with far more credibility than I ever could, given his unquestionable progressive credentials.

So instead of essentially saying ditto for several graphs, I thought it would be best to just share with you the entirety of Stoller's post.

YOU DON'T GET POINTS FOR TRYING

I'm going to get a lot of flack for this post, but here goes.

A filibuster is an extreme action that requires robust public
support. We do not have this support. It's that simple. I'm all for
keeping Alito off the court, and a filibuster until after the SOTU is
a good idea. But it's very important for the netroots to understand
what's happening here. This last-minute campaign to get Senators to
switch their votes, after it became crystal clear that we do not have
the votes to filibuster, is a classic example of 'get points for
trying' politics. It's a way for Senators to get credit from the
left-wing of the party without having to actually do anything or stop
anything. The reality is that this fight was lost two months ago,
when Senators decided that going on Christmas break was more important
than preparing to defend the constitution, and PFAW and Alliance for
Justice decided that releasing 150 page documents was a good way to
build public pressure against Alito's confirmation.

By all means, call your Senators. Don't stop. Don't let up. But
don't forgive the party leadership and our groups for this travesty.
People for the American Way has been preparing for this fight for
years. And then they didn't show up. The same is true with NARAL,
and the Alliance for Justice. I honestly don't know why they are
funded anymore - that's how bad this failure has been. And Senators -
including DiFi, HRC, Kerry, and Obama - have revealed themselves to be
craven fair weather fans who expect others to do the work of standing
up for Democratic values for them. Think about it for a moment. John
Kerry called for a filibuster from Switzerland two hours after it
became public that there were not enough votes for a filibuster. That
is atrocious. Tinman points out on Breaking Blue the essential point:


If he was serious about it he would have stayed in Washington, held
press conferences, lobbied his colleagues and tried to generate as
much attention as possible. Since it was just a PR stunt, it wasn't
necessary for Kerry to change his travel plans.

Democratic insiders have failed at the art of politics. It's that
simple. Doing politics is not about saying the right thing at the
wrong time, it's about lining up a coalition to push the levers of
social change. This they just don't do. For instance, at no point
has any insider poll or group leader laid out a strategy for victory.
No one defined victory. No one laid out a path to get there. And no
one communicated with various groups, including the netroots, on
helping us be part of a coalition to win. The communications
operation here is just atrocious. The insider groups have young
communications staffers dealing with bloggers who collectively talk to
1 million people a day. These are talented people, but they aren't
setting strategy and they don't have the juice to help us with this
fight.

And don't delude yourself, this is intentional. The attitude that
the insiders have towards us is that we are a stupid ATM set up to
feed their ineffectiveness. Witness uberinsider telling us the truth
about where we fit in:

"The bloggers and online donors represent an important resource for
the party, but they are not representative of the majority you need to
win elections," said Steve Elmendorf, a Democratic lobbyist who
advised Kerry's 2004 presidential campaign. "The trick will be to
harness their energy and their money without looking like you are a
captive of the activist left."

They are telling us, broadcasting to us, that they think we're
stupid. They think that having no campaign on Alito can easily be
fixed by posting a diary on Daily Kos urging us to 'fight' a month
after the fight has already been lost. It's craven, it's crass, it's
ridiculous.

Even so, with no direction and no communication, we've moved the vote
count on the filibuster to 37 from the high 20s. That's amazing. But
don't forget, they let us down, big time. And we should not forgive
them for this, until Alito is off the court. Because Alito and the
brutal decisions he will hand down is a reminder of the insiders'
desire for direct mail success over preserving the republic.