July 23, 2006
Here It Comes...
This week's Time magazine reports the following:
"... As for Bush himself, he is curtailing his traditional August working vacation at the ranch so that he can barnstorm before the midterm elections. Their outlook thus far seems so ominous for the G.O.P. that one presidential adviser wants Bush to beef up his counsel's office for the tangle of investigations that a Democrat-controlled House might pursue.
With the Democrats determined to make a major issue of Bush's foreign policy competence, the President seems ready to leap at the chance to refresh the landscape and make his own history. He had deliberately diverged from the Middle East course set by his two predecessors when he hired an unabashedly pro-Israel staff. "I'm all for conferences," Bush said in a 2004 appearance with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, "just so long as the conferences produce something." George H.W. Bush and his Secretary of State James Baker were seen as heroes by some Palestinians; Bill Clinton made the quest for Middle East peace a centerpiece of his legacy project. Bush aides say the times were different then and the vaunted progress under Clinton turned out to be what one called "a false stability."
Imagine that.... the Director of Lessons Learned (who makes more money than the Director of Fact Checking) must have told his President that the only way to defeat Democrats is by delving into their personal and not-so-public lives in attempt to disgrace them, because, let's face it, they ARE wrong on all the issues...
Read the whole story here
Posted by at July 23, 2006 11:55 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.mcblogger.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/610
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Here It Comes...:
» audition for teens from newest teen porn stars
nude cruise vacation pictures [Read More]
Tracked on January 30, 2007 03:01 AM
Comments
As a Congressional Staffer I can assure you that a Democratic Majority in Congress would fulfill its oversight responsibilites.
Posted by: Justin Hamilton at July 23, 2006 02:59 PM
Good to hear... God knows Congress needs desperately to reassert it's authority and put the executive in his place. We invaded a country we should never have attacked and at the top of the decision making process is a dry-drunk who thinks he hears voices.
We have democrats voting that the Iraqi Invasion is about the War on Terror. What's up with that?
Posted by: mcblogger at July 23, 2006 05:39 PM
Southern Dems mostly and those from really red states. On security these days they tend to take the "more catholic than the pope" position.
But half the reason the GOP lays out these BS resolutions is to trap dems in tight races. If you vote for it, Pelosi and the democrats can't agree on anything; If you vote against it, you're with Osama.
I tend to think that the Public is smarter than that.
There was a time when some joked that the last people out of Iraq would be the Democrats. Folks are coming around (helfully informed by public discontent).
Posted by: Justin Hamilton at July 23, 2006 10:33 PM
seige mentality is a real problem for them and we all see it from the outside. Tell the people in tough races to gut up and get out on the stump. Otherwise, the R's are going to keep playing this BS for years.
Sure, they can wait until they have polling but by then they will have missed the boat and they'll just look like they're pandering.
We see what's going on but it seems like you guys are getting media advice from people are retards. Is that about the gist of it?
Posted by: mcblogger at July 23, 2006 11:53 PM
its not so much getting bad media advice (not that there aren't pleanty of snake oil salesman inside the beltway) as it is trying to present a unified front.
We have some folks in the Caucus who are just that conservative. And I think we would make a mistake by shunning them (though I hope that people are learning valuable lessons from Liberman's situation). We also have the AIPAC crowd.
I think that people now realize that we don't need 100% of the members to take certain positions. But we weren't going to do it without trying.
There are a large group of us who believe that framing the choice for the election should include laying out what we would do about Iraq. There's other people here who think that framing the choice should be nothing more complicated than "bush is a failure, time for new management".
Posted by: Justin Hamilton at July 24, 2006 05:56 AM
The latter. All things spin out of that simple message. It also has the added virtue of being true AND believed by more than 50% of Americans. The more you pound on it, the more people will swing over and the R's will look even weaker.
Quit overthinking things. People don't give a shit about policy, they just want to think you know what you're talking about. As for the values voters, you present a good message (and have anyone other than Tim Kaine deliver it)and that will override the message of 'God wants you to vote R'.
It's like the Mondale school of messaging up there:)! Confusing, contradictory, overdetailed.
Posted by: mcblogger at July 24, 2006 01:53 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
