The President is busy thumbing his nose at Democrats (CNN). (One might also be tempted, as I was and did earlier, to use stronger language to describe his reaction).
President Bush, on a campaign swing in the West, is arguing the
Democratic Party is weak-kneed on national security and shouldn’t be
trusted to hold the reins of Congress."If you listen closely to
some of the leaders of the Democratic Party, it sounds like — it
sounds like — they think the best way to protect the American people
is, wait until we’re attacked again," Bush said Monday at a $360,000
fundraiser in Reno, Nevada, for state Secretary of State Dean Heller’s
congressional campaign.
Gee, who could have seen this coming? Senate Democrats give the Chimperor authorization to finally be King George in passing the Torture Act complete with his I’m-POTUS-and-final-interpreter-of-everything-and-I-AM-the-judicial-review provisions in order to present themselves as TOUGH ON TERROR (refusing to so much as put up a fight when it was well within their power to prevent this!), and Bush responds by painting them as soft on terror.
Oh. I guess Jack Balkin saw it coming:
So let me get this straight: The Democrats give
up the chance at filibustering one of the worst bills in recent memory
because they were afraid that the President would paint them as soft on
terrorism.After the bill passes, the President plans to paint them as soft on terrorism.
What a spineless, worthless lot the Democrats in the Senate are. They deserve every lost Senate and House seat that comes from this.
Jack Balkin and every other person of at least moderate intelligence, that is. Which would seem to preclude the Senate Democrats.
George Bush is wrong, of course, to claim that the Democratic plan of action is to get struck by a terrorist attack — hell, he’s wrong even to claim that he’s ever listened closely to anything. But the thing is, I still agree with him. I agree with his (verbal equivalent of a) rude hand gesture to the Democrats, and I agree with his desire to see each and every Democrat voted out of office. This may well be the worst thing Congress has ever done. For the Democrats not to stop it, even as the minority party, is simply inexcusable.
But do you want to hear something truly horrifying? The Republicans are even WORSE.
Accidental Blogger 
5 responses to “I agree with President Bush (Joe)”
As hard as the dems try to lose elections, damned if it doesn’t look lile the Goppers are trying even harder. Ain’t that the shit?
LikeLike
Thanks Joe, for keeping the strong language out of A.B. but artfully linking to it at another site. :-)
I appreciate your consideration and admire your blogging ingenuity.
You are absolutely right about the Dems. I am so frustrated. What exactly do they have to lose by standing up for democratic values? What makes them think that they they can avoid the label of “soft and spineless” unless they support everything that has a whiff of “national security,” however spurious and illegal that measure may be? They get slammed any way. Yet they keep carrying water for this lawless president for all his lawless, undemocratic mischiefs.
The answer could be one or more of the following:
1. Bush and his NSA wire tapping unearthed unsavory goods on some of the Dems which he now uses to blackmail them into supporting him. (Sujatha has the same suspicions)
2. The Dems are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and empathize with their tormentors.
3. They think they will win in November anyway. So they don’t want to stir up the pot by having a protracted debate on the war on terrorism which they (wrongly) believe is their Achilles Heel.
The Dems might indeed win in November in actual votes and still lose. (Take note, Jolly Roger) Sujatha had a timely reminder on how that might happen. Since 2004, the Democratic National Party has been involved in cats & dogs infighting over electoral strategy (between Howard Dean and Rahm Emanuel) but did not take the time to challenge the workings of electronic voting machines. We will again have votes cast without a paper trail. Diebold insists that it is not possible to design a machine that gives out a receipt. Yet every gas station, grocery store and ATM machine (many made by Diebold) can produce one.
LikeLike
Ruchira: Cass Sunstein has an interesting post about mortality science and politics here.
If it says what I remember it saying, the Democrats might be wise in trying to avoid discussion of 9/11 and terrorism — but even so, authorizing unchecked executive power and effectively even torture in wishy-washy terms is likely to hurt, or at least not help, them on that perception issue.
Of your three possible explanations, (3) strikes me as the most likely, although (1) is much more interesting (and certainly plausible). A related spin-off of (3), I think, would be the relevant risk-aversion leading them to play to “not lose” rather than to “win” (to borrow the sports cliche).
(This article on Howard Dean and his attempt to try to win votes everywhere instead of just hotly contested districts such as in Pennsylvania seems to support the view that Democrats in general are only interested in what polls well for them.)
LikeLike
Joe,
You have a point in the advantage that the endless ‘Terra terra’ flag waving confers on the Republicans. Maybe that’s why we have sound muted video track of the 9/11 hijackers pre 2001 being released ( coinciding, not unusually, with other problems for the admin), just as a strategy to increase the ‘mortality salience’ factor, as November approaches.
LikeLike
Agnes
Nothing venture, nothing have…
LikeLike