The Next Presidential and Congressional Races--Suicide or Victory

By: soccerdem
Published On: 9/16/2007 12:08:33 PM

It is increasingly obvious that, from all the views expressed on the Sunday talk shows, we will continue to keep troops in Iraq, no matter which party is in power and who is our next president.  All agree that we cannot pull all troops out and abandon a mess we created--we owe Iraq that.

As to how many troops eventually remain, for up to 10 years, perhaps, noone knows with certainty.

So, when all seem to agree that we will not pull ALL troops out for a long time, what do Dems run on?  And the answer is ACCOUNTABILITY.

Bush got us into the classic corner--we can't leave, we can't stay, so we'll keep some there for God knows how long and for whatever purpose--to quell uprisings, terrorist acts, stop coups.... But the Administration and their backers MUST be held responsible for this situation, not Democrats.  Accountability for  Republican backers' policy and actions  must be the main issue for the Democrats to use in order to sweep, because pulling all or part of our forces out will not be the key element of the election when almost all agree you cannot pull all troops out.

But note.

Watching Kerry and McCain and Russert on Meet the Press, I was once again struck by the inability of Kerry to respond to McCain's statement concerning the war --"which you voted for, John."  Kerry, as do most Dems, said nothing in response.  Literally nothing, instead talking about something else.  If Democrats cannot bring themselves to give a stock, pat response to the always repeated allegation that "you voted for it," what does this portend?  The CORRECT response is simplicity itself:  "We voted to give the President AUTHORITY to wage war if he thought it necessary, as a last resort,  based on the PROVED correctness of ALL intelligence he received.  WE DID NOT VOTE THAT HE MUST GO TO WAR!  We do not take death that lightly."  Or words to that effect, preferably loud and clear and fast.

The inability to respond correctly and thereby take as much responsibility for this disaster as the Decider and Cheney and his minions is as shameful as being unable to call Bush a liar.  Or being unable to respond correctly to Republicans saying "how can you criticise Petraeus, with all his experience?  Shameful!"  Dems may win in 2008, but there is plenty of time left for Republicans to regroup.

If the Dems still can't get the responses right, no matter how good it looks right now (politically) the Republicans can still pull it out.  Hillary isn't that popular, things change, stuff happens, and the right-wing machine will start to crank up.  Some central clearing house for intelligent responsiveness is so obviously needed, or we'll see a repeat of the "Gore lies" and the Kerry "lousy military record" campaigns.  Don't forget, Hillary is more vulnerable than they were.

Comments



So True (norman swingvoter - 9/16/2007 12:55:59 PM)
Our side must be ready for attacks by the far right neonuts and swiftboaters as well as republican politicans.  Accountability is a great issue for Dems. bush-cheney-rumsfeld formed fantasy invasion plans using neonut think tanks and yes people, firing and silencing those with differing opinions.  In anything you have to plan for obvious contingences. The fact that our leaders didn't is why we are in quagmires in Afghanistan and Iraq today. 


Debunk their Siren Song before it's too late! (Dianne - 9/16/2007 8:21:00 PM)
Over the last 6 years, Bush, his administration, and Republicans have attempted to destroy this country's government , destroy Iraq, and dismantle any credible position America has had in the global community.  But now, as soccerdem notes, is the golden opportunity to benefit from the harsh hand that Bush and company have dealt America and dumped on Iraq. 

The Republicans/conservatives are very adept at crafting messages:  For example, Frank Luntz crafts messages for the Republican Party using words and phrases that evoke strong emotional responses and which create a positive impression of the Republican Party....you know The Healthy Forests Act.  You can understand his talent when, on Terry Gross' Fresh Air (NPR) Luntz defined "Orwellian" (referencing author George Orwell's description of "an attitude and a policy of control by propaganda, misinformation, denial of truth, and manipulation of the past") as follows: 

"to speak with absolute clarity, to be succinct, to explain what the event is, to talk about what triggers something happening and to do so without any pejorative whatsoever."
And frankly Luntz has succeeded in helping Bush, Republicans and conservatives  accomplish their goal of changing and manipulating the discourse to their favor.

So soccerdem, I agree, Democrats need to debunk the conservative/Republican "siren song" about this war and how it came about.  I'd start with something like this:

"Hey aren't Republicans and conservatives always telling us that "you need to take person responsibility for your own actions"?  You know, ...pull yourself up by your bootstraps, don't look for excuses for not succeeding.  Well then I guess it's high time then that Bush and company admit to what everyone already knows -- that Bush got us into this war by deceit, that Bush had no "MBA Business Plan" for what he was going to do with Iraq once he owned it, that Bush then succeeded to butcher Iraq and all its resources, and then butcher the American military at the same time. But now Bush has the audacity to deny any fault of his own in this debacle, to try to deflect blame on Democrats, and to shove the "refuse pile" he created on to the next President.  What kind of political party is that that would put value on lying and then blaming someone else for their "refuse pile"?