Dear Tom Harkin:

Yes, Harvey Dent is appeasing the regressive right with his revamped trickle-down stimulus. It was only about three weeks ago when some in the fantasy-based community were hailing the stimulus as the lone, "progressive" beacon of light in the parade of Clintonian cabinet appointments. I wonder what their fallback position will be this time. Surely, it can't be Harvey's trickle-down health scheme which does more for those who already have insurance than for those who don't. We'll see how this developes. Keep showing the young bucks what a Democrat is supposed to be. America needs a little bit of old school right about now.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Harry Reid:

It is funny how one person with access to the media can turn a discussion about corruption into a discussion about race. He (or they if you want to be technical) made you look like a political amatuer. If you are not careful, some other individuals may use their six minutes of fame to do the same. There are other issues out here that can be reframed in ways that exposes political posturing for what it is.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Paul Street:

I love your use of the word "resume". A lot of people in the fantasy-based community are going to try to use this piece of legislation or that piece of legislation as proof that Harvey Dent and the photo-op coalition are really on our side. They don't seem to understand that the current democratic party exists to marginalize liberal policy advocates. They willfully forget that most politicians are lawyers who know how to use language that creates loopholes in any law, executive order, or judicial order. Thank you once again for exposing the "progressive" fairy tale that is Harvey Dent. If this was common knowledge, David Axelrod would have to find a new puppet in the regressive republican party.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear David Axelrod:

This is change, but this is not change that we can believe in. If your DNC puppet continues on this path, people are going to start asking questions about your other puppet in the White House. Most of us in the reality-based community already knew that the stuff about taking on the special interests was just campaign rhetoric. I may not like the direction that the national party (minus Howard Dean) is taking on corporate donors, but it is a bitter-sweet feeling to know that some folks in the fantasy-based community will have to evaluate the methods they use to judge politicians. And please........ don't respond back with your usual electoral jargon. Your White House puppet's poll numbers are irrelevant. It takes time for reality to set in.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Anthony Hamilton:

Please hurry up with that new album! Matt, Josh, and the boys are trying to marginalize anti-DLC commenters. I need something to deter me from exposing this data mining operation.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Matt Ortega:

What are you so afraid of? Tim Tigaris wouldn't make us sign a loyalty oath. That's so last election of you. That's so King George of you.

Your's Truly,
pee-wee

Dear Ta-Nehisi Coates:

If you understood what was really going on, you wouldn't have lost interest. I am not going to get into the specifics of the what, because the what is not as important as the why. They (the moral left) are doing it to move the political center to the left. It looks like a discussion over cabinet appointments, but it is really a policy debate. Both sides (the moral left and the amoral left) know what those policies are and the wonks on both sides are the ones using the cabinet appointments to bolster their own position. Harvey Dent's hitmen (the amoral left) are trying to get their licks in so they don't lose control of the narrative when this private, policy debate goes public.

Details matter.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Jon Favreau:

I don't appreciate you using my frames and one liners in your speeches. It's not because I think I own the words; it's just that our future yes-man-in-chief won't adopt my policies. I really don't give a damn about the words as long as the policies are enacted. Until then, keep using the same old, DLC, third way, unitarian garbage that worked so well on the amoral majority. When Harvey decides to leave the photo-op politics alone and get some moral backbone- holla at ya boy!

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Kos:

When I wrote to you the other day, I thought that I could spark your interest. Everyone had an opinion on hedge funds in last year's presidential primary. There's no reason why any desciple of Rubinomics should be spared the same fate as the others.

Oh, well.

Maybe this will get a rise out of you. I think it should be front page. Your headline could say this: "Why do we let insider traders run our economic policies?" You would get a million hits in one day. Of course the DLC sympathizers would huff and puff until their faces turned blue. So, what. A lot of folks in the fantasy-based community need to be exposed to some reality every now and then. They need to know that Robert Rubin is no hero. He has put America into decline from his positions in both government and business. Harvey Dent should quit associating himself with Rubin and Rubin's desciples; because they are bad news for anyone who claims to bring "change" to Washington D.C. The question you are going to have to deal with is: Are we a movement or a cheerleading squad? You have the power to decide which it will be. I hope you choose the former.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Paul Krugman:

Do you see how powerfully destructive your logic is? I'm not talking about economics. I'm talking about politics. You said that "progressives" weren't qualified to lead Harvey Dent's economic team, because they didn't have the right kind of experience in this time of national decline. By your logic, Bill Richardson isn't qualified to be Commerce Secretary. That's not good for business or politics, because the democratic wing of the elitist party needs token latinos in the cabinet to market it's "post-racial" image. If Harvey Dent was thinking like you, Bill Richardson (or Susan Rice) would be Secretary of State. That would have essentially killed all of the momentum built up by these last two years of photo-op politics. Either your logic is wrong or David Sirota is correct: You are trying to move the goalposts.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Bill Richardson:

You are not qualified to be Commerce Secretary. Yes, I know you used to be a republican who worked for a republican congressman and a republican White House. Yes, I know you switched to democrat and worked for a democratic congressman and a democratic White House. Yes, I know that you are a career politician and a career government jobber; but trust me on this: You are not qualified for this one position. You have never worked in the Department of Commerce, so that disqualifies you from any consideration. I got that from Paul Krugman.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Jeremy Scahill:

Just give it a rest. The amoral majority wants to be happy. The amoral majority wants to keep on living in the fantasy-based community. You are an enemy to their temporary happiness. Your crusade for permanent happiness is a roadblock to their temporary happiness. If amoral "journalists" say its alright for politicians to be two-faced, then it must be alright.

Leave the two-faced politicians alone!

Amoral "journalists" like Chris Matthews say that Harvey Dent chose all of those people you named to enact policies that they themselves don't agree with. Amoral "journalists" like Chris Matthews want all of us in the reality-based community to believe that these future cabinet members have been born again. Amoral "journalists" like Chris Matthews want everybody to believe that Harvey Dent's campaign promises represented the left of American politics. This is old news to those in the fantasy-based community. Residents of the reality-based community know better; but temporary happiness is to the amoral majority as crack is to Noel Bush. Nothing you do will stop the addiction.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Kos:

I really don't trust any so-called "journalist" other than Bill Moyers. I was wondering if you could verify whether or not this story is true and/or worthy of consideration concerning Larry Summers' hedge fund. This may be another reason why Harvey Dent shouldn't put his trust into people who brung us to this point of national decline. I hope you bring some clarity to this story.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Matt Stoller:

I don't know why you want to walk into the weeds with the others, but you are there now. It looks like it is coming down to the simplest of questions which has an obvious answer.

Do we trust Harvey Dent? Unequivocally. HELL. NO!

He has a record of flip-flops including the not-so-obvious healthcare flip-flop. He supports more coal, more nuclear, more offshore drilling, more exploration on public lands. He campaigned as if poverty and his prior support for single-payer healthcare didn't exist. And after campaigning against bad judgement, he is filling the executive branch with the same people that brought us to this point of national decline- including the first lady!

So, no. We don't trust him or most of the people he will be working with (that would include at least half of the democratic caucus). I'll try to offer suggestions, but I don't expect neither him nor anyone else in the photo-op coalition to listen. After all...........have they been listening to you?

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Jonathan Stein:

If you didn't already know, you should have asked somebody. Black people don't need a symbol. Black people need good paying jobs!

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Rachel Maddow:

While you were drooling over the word "mandate" did you notice how vague our future yes-man-in-chief was? Some people in the reality-based community are starting to catch on to what is happening: Harvey Dent uses the phrase "new direction" to repackage/relaunch third-way policies. Some in the fantasy-based community latch on to "direction" as a sign that Harvey supports "progressive" policies. Others in the fantasy-based community latch on to "new" as a sign that Harvey will be "competent". His selection of Gates shows that he was never "progressive" and he might not be as "competent" as some hoped. Most in the fantasy-based community probably feel that Gates could be no worse than his regressive republican friend William Cohen; but I just don't think that surgical strikes (as opposed to a full blown invasion) are any more moral, just because the executive order is signed by a donkey.

You have a degree in political science. I hope you get around to telling your viewers that there is nothing "new" about this. This is the same OLD kind of politics.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Harvey Dent:

I just want to clarify something that I wrote to you the other day. When I said we needed a small business flat tax, I wasn't talking about what you or the other photo-op politicians currently call small businesses. Before we can have a small business flat tax (to go with the living wage) we must first redefine what a small business is. Any business that has offices in more than one state shall not be considered a small business. Any business that is part of a franchise shall not be considered a small business. Any business which is a subcontractor for a big business shall not be considered a small business. I know how you Washington types are. Any hint of something that might appease the regressive right is seen as a way to look post-partisan. You are not getting off that easy.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Chris Bowers:

I was going to write a laundry list of things for you to say to your readers, but I realized that it would just turn into another back and forth session between those in the reality-based community who want to build a movement and those in the fantasy-based community who just want to maintain power. What I want to tell you instead is that narratives matter. Harvey Dent would say "stories" matter.

The people have a need to follow a leader. The people really want to follow a hero. I didn't want to admit it, but that's politics. While we in the reality-based community understand that Harvey Dent isn't all good and (more importantly) that King George isn't all evil, most in the fantasy-based community willfully deny that public policy is more complex than elephants vs. donkeys. When you write a perfectly accurate description of Harvey Dent's cabinet appointments, your fantasy-based readers see it as an attack on their hero. The only way to reach these readers is to create a new villain and a new hero.

Sadly, we don't have many leaders on our side. And without charisma, our few leaders would never be considered for hero status (Yes, charisma matters). What we can do until our hero decides to show himself is to find our villain.

Rahm Emanuel would have been a good choice, but any criticism of him now will be seen as an attack on Harvey Dent. Pelosi and Clinton are huge political risks. The only one I see that we can rally both the reality-based and the fantasy-based communities against is Steny Hoyer. You already know what I am talking about.

Let me also warn you that a couple of your readers are posing as "progressives" yet they refuse to argue the point of your blog posts. The style of their comments tell me that they are professional politicos trying to discredit OpenLeft and steer other readers away from your blog.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

Dear Harvey Dent:

I hope that this new development forces some folks to reevaluate their allegiance to the fantasy-based community. I'm not that bothered, because I always knew you were a photo-op politician who would triangulate your way out of a circle. Since you've bought into the regressive, trickle-down economic philosophy (at least for the next two years) why not use this as an opportunity to challenge inequity in other parts of the tax code. I have a few suggestions that deserve more that just your political hitmen's attention:

*Small Business Flat Tax
*3-year Startup Business Tax Holiday
*Move top capital gains tax rate to 40%
*Property Tax Cap
*Wall Street Securities Sales Tax
*1% sales tax on Chinese products
*2% sales tax increase on alcohol (since you care SO much about crime and unwanted pregnancies)

The main goal is to create a tax code that will make the living wage a reality while simultaneously encouraging innovation and new ideas from *NEW* economic players. I am even willing to cut or eliminate dividend taxes since they tend to be long-term investments. You have shown yourself to be an establishment appeaser, but I am giving you a chance to prove me wrong.

Sincerely,
pee-wee

p.s. I didn't even mention a marijuana tax, but you haven't shown yourself to be socially liberal either.

Dear David Sirota:

Your last few posts have been very interesting. I completely understand your situation. You shouldn't have to preempt every one of your writings with a warning to readers, but they are so stuck on hero worship that it is almost a necessity. You might need a bigger mirror in the future, but the one you have now at least offers the readers a chance to get a small glance at themselves. Let me warn you that some folks like living in the fantasy-based community. You should be saving every penny from every paycheck for that jumbo sized mirror that lets everyone see their entire being.

And tell your readers that even though expanding trade to third world nations is NOT a need, we can expand trade with tarriffs. Yes We Can! LOL!

Sincerely,
pee-wee