The wrong time to attack Bush
Conason's theory that the GOP made gains because
Democrats were unwilling to criticize President Bush
just doesn't wash. In fact, voters have been
bombarded for the past two years with little else: "Illiterate,"
"born to wealth," "out of touch with 'Real Americans,'"
"unilateralist," "appointed, not elected."
In fact, I can't think of anything positive Democrats
did say about Bush. So, just for the sake of argument,
let's consider a contrarian possibility: that
unrelenting personal attacks on the president, in a time of national
crisis, may have drawn the voters to him and
the GOP. You'll have to admit, it's at least a possibility.
While we're at it, let's also look at recent Democrat campaign positions.
1. Agree that we must fight terrorism, but delay intervention in Iraq through obfuscation.
2. Call for an end to dependence on foreign oil, but vote against drilling in Alaska.
3. Point out that workers deserve a higher standard of living, but vote against tax cuts.
4. Warm the cockles of retirees' hearts by assuring
them you're for retirement security,
but campaign against
Social Security reform.
5. Agree that our kids deserve better education,
but don't permit even the mildest test of school vouchers.
Democrats refer to their party as "the big tent"
where everyone is welcome. They should recall that "the big tent"
was popularized by P.T. Barnum. His motto: "There's
a sucker born every minute." I think yesterday's election
results show that, when it comes to contradictory
messages, people are less likely to be suckered these days.
-- Rich Black
Why do I think this is a great letter? Because
it so succinctly distills the GOP positions into easily refuted nuggets.
If only the Democrats had had this letter, they
could have used it as the template for attacking the lies of the GOP.
Here are the lies, and how easily they are refuted:
"voters have been bombarded for the past two years
with little else" - In what bizarro world has this
happened? We have been bombarded with Churchillian,
statesman, great leader. Only on liberal websites and
comedy programs is the truth of Bush's idiocy
openly discussed. Meet the Press and the NBC Nightly News has
considered the topic of Bush's lack of presidential
qualifications off limits.
"in a time of national crisis" - Please show me
this current national crisis that presents so great a danger.
The current national crisis - the tanking economy
- is the product of the individual being criticized.
"1. Agree that we must fight terrorism, but delay
intervention in Iraq through obfuscation." - There is no link
between terrorism and Iraq. There is, however,
a direct link between Iraqi oil reserves and the future wealth
of the president's strongest supporters.
"2. Call for an end to dependence on foreign oil,
but vote against drilling in Alaska." - Drilling for oil in Alaska
will not in any way reduce our dependence on
foreign oil. It will, however, make money for the president's
strongest supporters.
"3. Point out that workers deserve a higher standard
of living, but vote against tax cuts." - Workers do
not receive the benefit of Bush's tax cut, only
the very wealthy - the president's strongest supporters.
"4. Warm the cockles of retirees' hearts by assuring
them you're for retirement security, but campaign
against Social Security reform." - The Republican
ideas about Social Security 'reform' are in direct
opposition to the concept of retirement security.
They are instead about funneling the retirement dollars of
retirees into the pockets of brokers and accountants,
some of the president's strongest supporters, when
they aren't doing the perp walk.
"5. Agree that our kids deserve better education,
but don't permit even the mildest test of school vouchers."
- School vouchers will benefit only the lucky
few who are able to get their children into private schools that
have no federally mandated obligation to open
their doors equally and equitably. School vouchers are all about
getting white kids out of black schools and into
religiously-funded all-white academies and for-profit schools,
both of which are run by (all together now) the
president's strongest supporters.
These five points were what the Republicans ran
on.
These were their debate points, and their arguments
rely on assumptions established through repeatition of
assertions until they are accepted as fact. This
election cycle began a decade ago when they began
beating these drums, to establish these 'facts'
in the minds of the electorate. Remarkably, the Democrats
failed to adequately challenge even one of them.
I suppose that would make too much sense, wouldn't it?
But simply refuting statements isn't enough, and
therein lies the source of the Democrats ultimate failure.
Therefore, I propose:
1. We fight terrorism by fighting the causes of terrorism - greed, injustice, hunger, disease, fear, and ignorance.
2. End our suicidal strategic dependence on foreign
oil by aggressively pursuing renewable energy sources.
The military should be leading the way in this
research, since a tank or plane that never needs refueling
would give them a distinct advantage on any battlefield.
3. Provide workers with a higher standard of living
by cutting their taxes and paying for these tax cuts by
ending the flow of corporate and personal welfare
to the wealthiest businesses and billionaires, and by
accounting for all the spending that goes on
in government, especially the looting of the federal
treasury at the Pentagon and HUD.
4. Warm the hearts of everyone by providing univeral
healthcare and retirement security not subject to the
vagaries of the stock market and capitalism,
and secure from the rapacious greed of lawmakers, CEOs and
unelected executives.
5. Provide education reform by ending the idiotic
system of local taxpayer based funding for local
schools. The educational future of a child should
not be subject to the whims of birth and poverty. All
children should have the same chance, and so
all schools must be funded from a national taxpayer base.
Jeff