This should be the Democrats' moment: The Bush administration is caught in an increasingly unpopular war; its plan to revamp Social Security is fading into oblivion; its deputy chief of staff is facing a grand jury probe. Though the Republicans control both houses of Congress as well as the White House, they seem to be suffering from political and intellectual exhaustion. They are better at slash-and-burn campaigning than governing.
So where are the Democrats amid this GOP disarray? Frankly, they are nowhere. They are failing utterly in the role of an opposition party, which is to provide a coherent alternative account of how the nation might solve its problems. Rather than lead a responsible examination of America's strategy for Iraq, they have handed off the debate to a distraught mother who is grieving for her lost son. Rather than address the nation's long-term fiscal problems, they have decided to play politics and let President Bush squirm on the hook of his unpopular plan to create private Social Security accounts.
Because they lack coherent plans for how to govern the country, the Democrats have become captive of the most shrill voices in the party, who seem motivated these days mainly by visceral dislike of George W. Bush. Sorry, folks, but loathing is not a strategy -- especially when much of the country finds the object of your loathing a likable guy.
The Democrats' problem is partly a lack of strong leadership. Its main spokesman on foreign policy has become Sen. Joseph Biden, a man who -- how to put this politely? -- seems more impressed with the force of his own intellect than an objective evaluation would warrant. Listening to Biden, you sense how hungry he is to be president, but you have little idea what he would do, other than talk . . . and talk.
The same failing is evident among Democratic spokesmen on economic issues. Name a tough problem -- such as energy independence or reform of Medicare and Social Security -- and the Democrats are ducking the hard choices. That may be understandable as a short-term political strategy: Why screw up your chances in the 2006 congressional elections by telling people they must make sacrifices? But this approach keeps the Democrats part of politics-as-usual, a game the GOP plays better.
Howard Dean is a breath of air as chairman of the Democratic National Committee -- but unfortunately a lot of it is hot air. Dean is admirably combative, and in that he reflects a party that is tired of being mauled by Karl Rove's divisive campaigning. The problem with Dean is that, like his party, he doesn't have much to say about solving problems. Pressed about Iraq last Sunday on CBS's "Face the Nation," Dean passed the buck: "What we need is a plan from the president of the United States." Rather than condemn a NARAL Pro-Choice America ad against the Supreme Court nomination of Judge John G. Roberts that was so outrageous it was pulled from the air, Dean averred: "I'm not even going to get into that."
Today's Democrats have trouble expressing the most basic theme of American politics: "We, the people." Rather than a governing party with a clear ideology, they are a collection of interest groups. For a simple demonstration, go to the DNC's Web site and pull down the menu for "People." What you will find is the following shopping list: "African American, Asian Amer./Pacific Islanders, Disability Community, Farmers and Ranchers, Hispanics, GLBT (Gay-Lesbian-Bisexual-Transgender) Community, Native Americans, Religious Communities, Seniors & Retirees, Small Business Community, Union Members & Families, Veterans & Military Families, Women, Young People & Students." That's most of the threads in the national quilt, but disassembled.
What can the Democrats do to seize the opportunities of the moment? I suggest they take a leaf from Newt Gingrich's GOP playbook and develop a new "Contract With America." The Democrats should put together a clear and coherent list of measures they would implement if they could regain control of Congress and the White House. If the Democrats are serious, some of these measures -- dealing with economics and energy -- will be unpopular because they will call for sacrifice. But precisely for that reason, they will show that the Democrats can transcend interest-group America and unite the country.
America doesn't need more of the angry, embittered shouting matches that take place on talk radio and in the blogosphere. It needs a real opposition party that will lay out new strategies: How to withdraw from Iraq without creating even more instability? How to engage a world that mistrusts and often hates America? How to rebuild global institutions and contain Islamic extremism? How to put the U.S. economy back into balance? A Democratic Party that could begin to answer these questions would deserve a chance to govern.
-------------------- "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE U.S./CHINA CONNECTION"
posted
The Democrats ALWAYS start in on it first. The Republicans don't want to hear the jibber jabble so we end it but Democratic loud mouths like Kennedy and Feinstein just yap yap yap all the way home.
-------------------- "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE U.S./CHINA CONNECTION"
posted
"How to withdraw from Iraq without creating even more instability?"
Where is the BUSH plan? After all, he got us into this Iraq quagmire.
"How to engage a world that mistrusts and often hates America?"
Where is the BUSH plan? His policies of secrecy and domination have made this mustrust fairly justifiable.
"How to rebuild global institutions and contain Islamic extremism?"
Where is the BUSH plan? His war-mongering and idiotic comments like "axis of evil" and "bring 'em on" have no doubt fueled terrorism recruitment activities worldwide.
"How to put the U.S. economy back into balance?"
Where is the BUSH plan? He continues to borrow more than all other presidents combined.
I mean... granted, the Dems could use a backbone, but shouldn't the team that caused most of the problems be held responsible for at least some of the solutions?
Keeee-rist!
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
When anyone, (like Murtha for example), dares to offer constructive criticism or an idea for a solution, he or she is quickly "marginalized" by the Rove Smear Team.
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
posted
Right Smears Veteran Murtha Without A Qualm by E. J. Dionne Jr.
WASHINGTON- I Underestimated the viciousness of the right wing.
In November, Rep. John Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat and a decorated Marine combat veteran in Vietnam, came out for a rapid American withdrawal from Iraq. At the time, I wrote: "It will be difficult for Bush's acolytes to cast Murtha, who has regularly stood up for the military policies of Republican presidents during his 31 years in Congress, as some kind of extreme partisan or hippie protester."
No, the conservative hit squad didn't accuse Murtha of being a hippie. But a crowd that regularly defends President Bush for serving in the Texas Air National Guard instead of going to Vietnam has continued its war on actual Vietnam veterans. An outfit called the Cybercast News Service last week questioned the circumstances surrounding the awarding of two Purple Hearts to Murtha because of wounds he suffered in the Vietnam War.
Sen. John Kerry, as well as Sen. John McCain -- who faced scurrilous attacks on his war record when he was running against Bush in the 2000 South Carolina primary -- could have warned Murtha, if you're a Vietnam veteran, don't you dare get in the way of George W. Bush.
David Thibault, editor in chief of Cybercast, made it very clear to the Washington Post's Howard Kurtz and Shailagh Murray that Murtha was facing accusations about his 1967 service now because "the congressman has really put himself in the forefront of the anti-war movement." In other words, if Murtha had just shut up and gone along with Bush, nothing would have been said about his service.
As it is, the charges are remarkably flimsy. Former Rep. Don Bailey, D-Pa., whom Murtha defeated in a 1982 congressional race after a redistricting, said that Murtha had told him he did not deserve his Purple Hearts, Kurtz and Murray reported. Bailey, who won a Silver Star and three Bronze Stars in Vietnam, recalled Murtha saying: "Hey, I didn't do anything like you did. I got a little scratch on the cheek."
Authentic war heroes (including McCain) often downplay their own heroism. In any event, what we know about Murtha, McCain, Kerry and, yes, Bailey, is that they served in combat in Vietnam. What we know about Bush and Vice President Dick ("I had other priorities in the '60s than military service") Cheney is that they didn't.
What's maddening here is the unblushing hypocrisy of the right wing and the way it circulates -- usually through Web sites or talk radio -- personal vilification to abort honest political debate. Murtha's views on withdrawing troops from Iraq are certainly the object of legitimate contention. Many in Murtha's party disagree with him. But Murtha's right-wing critics can't content themselves with going after his ideas. They have to try to discredit his service.
Moreover, the right has demonstrated that its attitude toward military service is entirely opportunistic. In the 1992 presidential campaign, when the first President Bush confronted Bill Clinton -- who, like Cheney, avoided military service entirely -- conservatives could hardly speak or write a paragraph about Clinton that didn't accuse him of being a draft-dodger. In October 1992, Bush assailed Clinton. "A lot of being president is about respect for that office and about telling the truth and serving your country," Bush told a crowd in New Jersey. "And you are all familiar with Gov. Clinton's various stories and what he did to evade the draft."
But from 2000 forward, the Republicans had a problem: they confronted Democrats, first then-Vice President Al Gore and then Kerry, who actually did go to Vietnam, while it was their own standard-bearers who had skipped the war. Suddenly, Vietnam service wasn't the thing at all. When a Democrat goes to war, there must be something wrong with the way he has done it. Gore's service was dismissed because he worked "only" as a military journalist. You can even find Bush's defenders back in 2000 daring to argue that flying planes over Texas was more dangerous than joining the Army and serving in Vietnam the way Gore did.
The Republicans had an even bigger problem with Kerry, who did unquestionably dangerous duty patrolling rivers. Not to worry. The Swift Boat Veterans simply smeared him.
"War's a nasty business," Murtha said on CBS' "60 Minutes" Sunday. "It sears the soul. The shadow of friends killed, the shadow of killing people lives with you the rest of your life. So there's no experience like being in combat."
Unfortunately, politics is a nasty business, too. There is no honor given to those who serve if they choose later to take on the powers that be.
posted
San Francisco Chronicle..... Even funnier!!! HAHAHAHA!!! I can imagine who runs that newspaper. Let me guess..... RuPaul? Or perhaps Elton John? Oh wait..... Maybe Rosie O'Donnell? LoL!!! Of course the ultra left-winged libbies in San Francisco write garbage like that. The entire city of San Francisco equals the entire state of Massachusetts. I will never understand why Tony Bennett ever decided to sing a song about that God awful city. He should of renamed it, "I left my heart in Garland Texas" instead.
-------------------- "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE U.S./CHINA CONNECTION"
posted
The SF Chronicle is owned by the Hearst Corporation, and the article was written in Washington DC.
Now how about staying on-topic and answering my questions?
***********************************************
"How to withdraw from Iraq without creating even more instability?"
Where is the BUSH plan? After all, he got us into this Iraq quagmire.
"How to engage a world that mistrusts and often hates America?"
Where is the BUSH plan? His policies of secrecy and domination have made this mustrust fairly justifiable.
"How to rebuild global institutions and contain Islamic extremism?"
Where is the BUSH plan? His war-mongering and idiotic comments like "axis of evil" and "bring 'em on" have no doubt fueled terrorism recruitment activities worldwide.
"How to put the U.S. economy back into balance?"
Where is the BUSH plan? He continues to borrow more than all other presidents combined.
I mean... granted, the Dems could use a backbone, but shouldn't the team that caused most of the problems be held responsible for at least some of the solutions?
Keeee-rist!
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
posted
Maybe you should ask the President. Camp out in front of his ranch for 6 months and maybe, just maybe, he'll answer you. BUT..... I'm sure if you call Pat Robertson during his segment called "Bring it On" on the 700 Club, he'll give you an answer directly from God.
-------------------- "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE U.S./CHINA CONNECTION"
posted
How about staying on-topic and answering my questions?
***********************************************
"How to withdraw from Iraq without creating even more instability?"
Where is the BUSH plan? After all, he got us into this Iraq quagmire.
"How to engage a world that mistrusts and often hates America?"
Where is the BUSH plan? His policies of secrecy and domination have made this mustrust fairly justifiable.
"How to rebuild global institutions and contain Islamic extremism?"
Where is the BUSH plan? His war-mongering and idiotic comments like "axis of evil" and "bring 'em on" have no doubt fueled terrorism recruitment activities worldwide.
"How to put the U.S. economy back into balance?"
[b]Where is the BUSH plan? He continues to borrow more than all other presidents combined.
I mean... granted, the Dems could use a backbone, but shouldn't the team that caused most of the problems be held responsible for at least some of the solutions?
Keeee-rist!
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
posted
Tony Bennett..... I'm sure Bush DOES have an exit strategy HOWEVER, we'll be in Iraq for a few more years. I'm sure you'll hear about his "plan" when the time is right. Why are you asking me? I'm not the President. Also, the Democrats need to quit saying, "withdraw now". Withdraw the troops now and see what will happen. I truly believe if John Kerry was President right now, we'd still be in Iraq for the next couple of years. Ralph Nader was the moron who would of pulled the troops out immediately and put Saddam Hussein back to his old post. Thank you, I need to trade. Be back later for more of your liberal terrorist remarks.
-------------------- "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE U.S./CHINA CONNECTION"
posted
I can't wait to hear about Bush's plan; the one you say he'll reveal in "a few more years," after potentially thousands more Americans are dead.
Now... what about the rest of my questions?
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
posted
If we withdrew now, chances are, there could possibly be more terrorist acts similar to 9/11 that can happen in the U.S. at any moment. Would we want to take that chance? Now that would KILL MORE AMERICANS in the Homeland. Our troops dying is sad. BUT they enlist in the military expecting to go to war at any time when they are called upon. They serve this country and they do it well. I can't even begin to tell you how proud I am of all that are serving this nation. I feel much safer in this country knowing that Bush won the 2004 election than let's say if Al Gore or John Kerry was President right now. And no, I was never in the military.
-------------------- "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE U.S./CHINA CONNECTION"
posted
well Dweeeb... you've exhausted me. Good luck with you're ranting. I'm gonna go hug a tree and try to evoke some feelings of kinship with mother earth. You spew too much hate. I get a really bad vibe from you.
posted
Both Gore and Kerry served there country ,not that I am a democrat, like Mcain did , all three were the victim of the chiken hawks attack on there service. As far as him keeping us safe from the enemy I have not laughed so hard in years only a nocombat vet would think that anything he is doing now would stop an enemy. History is full of cases to present that an ocuppied country still invades another country with determination and force. And we must have the easiest borders in the world to cross ask the Mexican illegals who walk across to the tune of 1500 a day the US border Patrol says. If chicken hawk is so afraid of an enemy coming here why is he not doing something about the obvious. I tell you why that would take morals and back bone. Not only that but the hatred of being ocuppied motivates them more to give the enemy a taste of what they are doing to them learn about human nature and quit looking at the world through the eyes of a weakling.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by jordanreed: well Dweeeb... you've exhausted me. Good luck with you're ranting. I'm gonna go hug a tree and try to evoke some feelings of kinship with mother earth. You spew too much hate. I get a really bad vibe from you.
I'm actually quite surprised that you're exhausted. I thought Democrats kept running their mouths until a Republican like me gives up. Oh, and about the "hate" comment, it's the liberals who hate America. I don't hate. Well, I do hate insects with wings but that's about it.
-------------------- "NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE U.S./CHINA CONNECTION"
quote:Originally posted by jordanreed: well Dweeeb... you've exhausted me. Good luck with you're ranting. :cool: I'm gonna go hug a tree and try to evoke some feelings of kinship with mother earth. You spew too much hate. I get a really bad vibe from you.
I'm actually quite surprised that you're exhausted. I thought Democrats kept running their mouths until a Republican like me gives up. Oh, and about the "hate" comment, it's the liberals who hate America. I don't hate. Well, I do hate insects with wings but that's about it.
In addition to being a foul mouthed nincompoop, you are a pervert.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DWE: If we withdrew now, chances are, there could possibly be more terrorist acts similar to 9/11 that can happen in the U.S. at any moment. Would we want to take that chance? Now that would KILL MORE AMERICANS in the Homeland. Our troops dying is sad. BUT they enlist in the military expecting to go to war at any time when they are called upon. They serve this country and they do it well. I can't even begin to tell you how proud I am of all that are serving this nation. I feel much safer in this country knowing that Bush won the 2004 election than let's say if Al Gore or John Kerry was President right now. And no, I was never in the military.
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
posted
Karl Rove will stop at nothing, including falsifying the records of American war heroes in his own party. He reminds me of Joseph Goebbels.
quote:Originally posted by bond006: Both Gore and Kerry served there country ,not that I am a democrat, like Mcain did , all three were the victim of the chiken hawks attack on there service.
-------------------- "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
posted
We already know that the Republicans have no idea how to run this country so we might as well vote them out next time around and hope that the people eventually take back control of this fine democracy.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
I'm gonna go hug a tree and try to evoke some feelings of kinship with mother earth. You spew too much hate. I get a really bad vibe from you.
