« Impeachment? | Main | How It Is »
September 10, 2005
When Life Gives You Lemons, Throw Them at Republicans
Shakes and Ezra are talking about impeachment, and there are a couple things I'd like liberals thinking in this vein to keep in mind. The first is that Bush has only 3 1/2 years left as an elected official. Certainly, there are benefits to damaging him personally, especially insofar as this makes it hard for him to enact the right-wing agenda over the next 40+ months. But the causes we care about will reap much more benefit from long-term damage to voter perceptions of the Republican party than from damage to Bush's personal reputation. Those two things are definitely linked, but right now the biggest focus shouldn't be on going after Bush himself, it should be about eroding positive stereotypes of Republicans and deepening negative ones. For example, the point needs to be made that Republicans aren't interested in fiscal responsibility or cutting spending -- really, they just want to borrow lots of money and hand it over to big corporations. That's a fiscal agenda that nobody in America is willing to defend.
Thinking into a happy 2006 where Democrats win one or the other chamber of Congress, the I-word I like a lot more than "impeachment" is "investigation". We still haven't had an investigation into Iraq intelligence failures that issued from the White House, and we could make Bush regret not letting his own Republican Congress investigate those. I'd be quite happy to see the GOP recognized as the party of foreign policy incompetence that it is. All the administration's Halliburton giveaways could be investigated, shedding light on Republican corruption. To push the fiscal mismanagement issue, we could -- after watching the cost of the 2003 Medicare Bill run out of control -- investigate why the White House tried to cover up the actual cost of the program by threatening to fire the actuary who wanted Congress to know the truth. It'll be the most awesome silver lining ever if Bush's misdeeds allow us to destroy the GOP's reputation, permitting resurgent Democrats to institute a smart foreign policy and higher taxes on the rich and free preschool for everyone and single-payer healthcare.
On the question of how possible future impeachment proceedings would be publicly received, I'm a bit more sanguine than Ezra. One thing that turned people against the Republicans back in the Clinton times was the sheer absurdity of impeaching a president over post-blowjob issues. As evidenced by the polling reaction to the Terri Schaivo spectacle, Americans occasionally recognize bullshit for what it is. We've got a lot bigger stuff to pin on Bush than the deceptions involved in covering up a bit of illicit fellatio. But I really don't see how much we have to gain in doing this, and impeaching a president is a lot harder than launching a fruitful and damaging investigation.
September 10, 2005 in Republicans | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c572d53ef00d83461ce8f69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference When Life Gives You Lemons, Throw Them at Republicans:
Comments
Do Something.
It feels good.
Some people been talkin'
http://fluxrostrum.blogspot.com/2005/09/katrina-victims-whimper-or-fight.html
it'll be real.
http://www.campkatrina.org/
Posted by: FluxRostrum | Sep 10, 2005 5:13:01 PM
Our GOPer Congresscreep, suddenly claiming fiscal austerity, voted against the Katrina aid package. I hope she will have to pay for that vote next year.
Posted by: stumpy | Sep 10, 2005 5:28:45 PM
Sensible words. Dear Leader, as incompetent as he is, is not the real problem. The GOP is controlled by its evil wing and it's their ideology that's the problem.
Posted by: J Bean | Sep 10, 2005 5:32:42 PM
The entire political system of this country should be impeached, Ezra. It's all rotten to the core.
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Sep 10, 2005 5:38:12 PM
the I-word I like a lot more than "impeachment" is "investigation".
As I said in another comments thread, I don't even care about what specifically is called for, as long as it's something that's said repeatedly and serves the purpose of putting the onus on the GOP to explain their unwillingness to address real policy failures. I'm not picky - I just want control of the conversation for a change! :-)
Posted by: Shakespeare's Sister | Sep 10, 2005 6:18:15 PM
"They don't want what you want" -- any variation on that theme will work.
The "evil wing" of the Republican Party is simply a combination of extremely wealthy patrons and politically active corporate executives, with poor and middle class white ignoramuses. The success of that alliance of the greedy with the stupid rests on the belief among the stupid that Bush (and pundits like O'Reilly) is one of them, shares their values and outlook, etc., and that the Democrats are remote elitists, who want gay marriage and want to bar snowmobiles from the national parks, etc.
Most Democrats, in my reading experience, want their own prejudices confirmed. Especially among the Democratic and liberal bloggers, there's no more favored attack on the Republicans than the insult, "ideologues." Michael Brown (FEMA head) is not smart enough to be an ideologue; he's just a mediocrity on the gravy train. And, neither the greedy nor the stupid wing of the Republican Party cares about ideology, which is why it has been so easy for Bush to pursue policies inimical to the nominal "ideology" of the Republican Party.
If you want to consign the Republican Party to oblivion, then the key is corruption, not ideology. Convince a fair part of the stupid wing of the Republican Party of the simply truth that Bush and his co-partisans want to betray the stupid wing, to get at the money, and the modern Republican Party is dead.
The opportunity is presenting itself, with Katrina. The Congress just appropriated over $50 billion. If Iraq serves as precedent, much of that money will simply disappear, and a good deal of the rest will pass to Halliburton, Bechtel and the like. Louisiana, being Louisiana, many of the poor blacks, who actually own property now under water will be robbed blind, as developers swoop in, in land grabs. Much of this may well be orchestrated in the interests of the Republican Party, which would very much like to wrest control of Louisiana from the Democratic Party.
The U.S. has lost the war in Iraq to corruption; nothing in Iraq is any better than the day before we invaded, and the reason is simply the corruption and incompetence of the Coalition Provisional Authority. This has been reported extensively in the U.S., but most Americans have been able to ignore the reality. What happens in New Orleans will be much harder to ignore.
Exposing corruption is fairly hard, without control of one house or the other of Congress. But, Democrats remain in control of Louisiana, and will have an interest in exposing reconstruction controlled by Republicans, so there's some hope there. And, the Republicans could lose control of one house of Congress in 2006; it could happen.
Posted by: Bruce Wilder | Sep 10, 2005 6:21:46 PM
Ezra says: "For example, the point needs to be made that Republicans aren't interested in fiscal responsibility or cutting spending -- really, they just want to borrow lots of money and hand it over to big corporations. That's a fiscal agenda that nobody in America is willing to defend."
Sorry, a lot of us who vote Republican think that Bush has done a lousy job on fiscal responsibility and cutting spending. But that doesn't mean that we will start voting for Democrats.
And a lot of us who vote Republican are as opposed to Corporate Welfare as a lot of people who vote Democratic. But Democrats in Congress are just as quick to hand out Corporate Welfare as Republicans. They just choose a little different priorities for it - and pretend that they are not doing it.
I think that you will have a hard sell convincing Americans that Democrats are better fiscally or on Corporate Welfare.
A lot of Americans vote by picking the lesser of two evils. Democrats will have to do a lot better than glossing up their image to seem more responsible than Republicans. ... Let's see, how about proposing some sensible policies instead?! There is an idea.
Posted by: Dan Morgan | Sep 10, 2005 9:04:38 PM
"If you want to consign the Republican Party to oblivion, then the key is corruption, not ideology."
Of course I am much more interested in controlling Congress than the Presidency, unless it is all that is available.
Perhaps. I am cynical enough to believe that the average American is not offended by patronage and skimming, he might and probably does the same in his worklife, on a much smaller scale.
On the other hand, maybe history can be a guide. The Republicans were competitive in Congress for many years, and then they were not players for what, 35-40 years? What was it in the late 40s and early 50s that took them out of contention? Your average Joe can imagine getting his cousin a job and cheating on his taxes, but making his sister schoolteacher sign a loyalty oath and banning horror comic books were not in his playbook.
Just saying maybe we can give this more thought.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Sep 10, 2005 9:13:13 PM
PS: The Democrats did have success by painting the Republicans as ideological extremists in the 50s and 60s, but were helped in the project by having a solid core of nutcases in their own party living south of Mason-Dixon. Now that the nutcases have formed a coalition It may be harder, or it may be easier.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Sep 10, 2005 9:22:38 PM
A startling fact about the above post: It wasn't actually written by Ezra! Lots of people don't know this, but he occasionally brings "guestbloggers" to his site on the weekends to add content. Smart observers know that the tell-tale sign of a guestblogger is the byline at the top of the post.
Mr. Morgan, I'd refer you to the Democratic and Republican versions of the 2003 Medicare bill. Democrats wanted the government to be able to use its big-purchaser negotiating power to get lower prices on prescription drugs; Republicans just let their allies in pharmaceutical companies run away with bigger profits. Do you see any brake on this kind of behavior in the Republican party? Is there any force that will prevent future Republicans from being just like Bush? None of his policies would have passed without his Senate and Congressional Republican majorities. Unless you appoint some Republican with a stern balanced-budget record, you can look forward to Bushian deficits all over again. You're a lot better off with Clinton-style Democrats who are trying to run Rubinomics II where deficit reduction leads to a stronger economy.
Personally, I'm closer to Bruce Wilder's side of the what-annoys-Americans debate than the alternative position that bob mcmanus mentions but doesn't endorse.
Posted by: Neil the Ethical Werewolf | Sep 10, 2005 10:58:53 PM
Well Dan may not vote Democratic, but my Republican sister-in-law in San Antonio has already decided to.
"Investigation" has such a DNC wimp factor sound - I think the Republicans have inoculated the public from the shock of impeachment back with Clinton. The Democrats need to grow some balls - investigation is something Lieberman would vigorously support.
This administration is so much more criminal than Nixon's - impeachment is the least we can do. Of course, we need the Senate to actually remove the SOB from office.
Posted by: pebird | Sep 11, 2005 1:15:56 AM
"than the alternative position that bob mcmanus mentions but doesn't endorse."
Well, I am not completely clear on what this means, but I have promoted a defined strategy elsewhere. You won't like it.
Democrats can run against corruption and incompetence, but it seems when it is done in a wonkish technocratic frame we lose...reference Dukakis and early Gore. Elections are won on values not issues. We should run a populist campaign based on compassion, fairness, tolerance....but in an attack mode. The details are up to the experts, but the "daisy ad" and LBJ hugging a little black girl worked to increase Republican negatives.
The problem is that Republicans will call themselves "compassionate conservatives" and the party of peace, and we need to contrast.
Now maybe we can go so far as to use actual pictures from the NOLA Convention Center, but I am told meaness doesn't work for Dems, so whatever.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Sep 11, 2005 1:37:06 AM
I am trying to think of elections won on corruption and reform. It is always hard, even in retrospect, to know why or how an election was won.
Carter, I guess, tho he didn't do the party any good.
Reagan? I vaguely remember a campaign against Tip O'Neill and welfare queens, but there was a lot more to Reagan's win than that.
Coolidge?
Truman in 48? The "do nothing Congress" had a lot of different content in it.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Sep 11, 2005 1:51:02 AM
Dismiss me as a mono-subject crank if you will but remember you heard it here first.
There is Democratic electoral gold buried in Social Security "crisis". A narrative has been deliberately created over a 22 year period. You can read all about it in this issue of the Cato Journal from Fall 1983 Cato Journal: Social Security: Continuing Crisis or Real Reform?. Particularly illuminating is Butler & Germanis (warning PDF) Achieving a Leninist Strategy You read it and you see an entire roadmap laid out, one which has been faithfully followed ever since. The Republican playbook on Social Security has simply been sitting out there in open view in black and white. It is stunning really.
The problem for Bush style Republicans is that while they hate Social Security on ideological grounds they decided 22 years ago that they couldn't win that way. Instead they decided on a self-described Leninist strategy of selling Social Security "crisis". Which worked astonishingly well. They succeeded brilliantly in selling their narrative, to the point that even Progressives hardly think to challenge it, or even to believe that it can be challenged.
But every bit of the narrative revolves around "crisis" and "bankruptcy". It dissolves when confronted with "solvency", and if you look at the actual numbers you see "solvency" staring you in the face.
This is the message that can turn the Republican Party into elephant rinds. Prove that they are lying about Social Security and shove them right onto the Third Rail of American Politics.
Progressives tend to look at Social Security and see a temporary victory. Nope an actual look at the game clock shows us up 3 touchdowns with a minute to play.
Which leads to this Democratic slogan. "The Republican Party - they have been lying to you. Again." Too many people bought into Iraq, too many people still want to support the troops to make that the point of attack. But the majority know they were played. Pointing out the Republican lies on Social Security could serve to stir up the whole bubbling pile of discontent.
We just need to embrace our inner FDR and get out of the defensive crouch we have been over Social Security. It's not broke and anyone who says it is is either ignorant or lying. And the liars dominate the upper echelons of the Republican Party. Educate the ignorant and they will punish the liars. Because nobody but some Randian fanatics signed up in the War on Social Security.
Rock the Vote: Don't Get Played And BTW the numbers are even better than this Flash suggests.
Posted by: Bruce Webb | Sep 11, 2005 10:46:59 AM
what we've been doing -- calling republican bullshit every time it happens and making sure everyone hears it -- is working well. everyone but limbaugh clones knows full well by now that bush should be impeached, but republicans control congress. so that's one more thing republicans aren't gonna do right, in addition to:
-trying to cut the inheritance tax instead of sending troops to evacuate new orleans
-interfering in the personal decision of people like terri schiavo
-detaining american citizens without trial for over three years
-giving money hand over fist to republican donors like halliburton, which keep squandering it
-trying to destroy social security
-bankrupting our country, which has led to higher local taxes and/or impoverished schools and police
-weakening our military
-failing to prevent 9/11
-turning post-9/11 world sympathy into unprecedented levels of international anti-american sentiment by breaking international law
-sending american jobs to central america without ensuring labor and environmental fairness
-letting enron rape californian grandmothers
-paperless touch-screen voting (thanks for "delivering the election," diebold!)
-making it harder for you and me to declare bankruptcy, while giving enormous handouts to corporations that ask
-repeatedly cutting rich people's taxes, so normal people have to pay a bigger share
off the top of my head.
we need to talk about specific republican senators and congressmen, about the specific stupid things they've done. we can't count on the local kdum news to do it.
Posted by: jami | Sep 11, 2005 12:31:53 PM
AAAAAARGH, this is wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. HE will NOT be gone in 3 years--his shadow will loom long. All presidents cast long shadows.
George Bush is the leader of the Republican Party. Whatever HE is, they are. They are all on record praising him, saying wonderful things about him. Furthermore, they PICKED him to lead their party. And even if all that weren't true, he's the most prominent Republican now.
Make it THEIR problem to seaparate the party from the man.
Fer Chrissake, Bill Clinton was slandered as an opportunist for 8 years. Since then, we hear "the Democrats don't believe in anything." Do you think that's fucking coincidence?
The President IS the party, unless the party disavows him (and Americans don't like disloyalty, either, so if they disavow him, that's a win, too.)
Posted by: theorajones | Sep 12, 2005 1:50:20 PM
What a bunch of morons. I almost feel sorry for the democrats.... almost.
Posted by: merkley??? | Sep 13, 2005 12:19:58 AM
Posted by: apply for a master card | Nov 29, 2006 4:16:48 AM
Settle your debts for less
Posted by: Debt Settlement Lawyer | Apr 27, 2007 8:07:37 PM
http://3freesex.com x
Posted by: Zmajrjt | Jun 3, 2007 3:29:14 AM
http://3freesex.com x
Posted by: Zmajrjt | Jun 3, 2007 3:29:26 AM
Funny, interresting, nice, ... this is your blog http://boymedexams.ifrance.com/
Posted by: boy med exam | Jul 14, 2007 1:49:45 AM
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
wow gold
Warcraft Gold
Warcraft Gold
powerleveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
wow gold
wow gold
World of Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
powerleveling
powerleveling
power leveling
power leveling
wow powerleveling
wow powerleveling
wow power leveling
wow power leveling
wow power level
wow power level
wow power level
wow power level
world of warcraft powerleveling
world of warcraft powerleveling
world of warcraft power leveling
world of warcraft power leveling
World of Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
warcraft gold
warcraft gold
gold warcraft
gold warcraft
gold wow
gold wow
Cheap WoW Gold
Cheap WoW Gold
buy wow gold
buy wow gold
World of Warcraft Gold
World of Warcraft Gold
Posted by: zsdzgfsd | Sep 2, 2007 3:32:41 AM
Lovely, I must say, there is not so much themes, which deserve a comment. This one is realy needful http://straponcrush.ifrance.com/
Posted by: strapon dom | Sep 25, 2007 8:00:05 AM
Home is where you hang your @. Thanks good site.
http://fgdpmk.iifree.net/e74b23/map.html
Posted by: [*names.txt*] | Oct 30, 2007 4:28:47 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
