Rumsfeld, Abramoff, Foley: Shortsighted Democratic Response

[Parisle]

---- On the surface of it, the travails of these three republicans appear as a gift-horse for the democratic party effort to both re-take congress and neutralize the final two years of Bush insanity. And I'm not saying they're not, but constructive political reaction to their respective circumstances may not always arise from first instincts. The three embattled GOP'ers represent a great microcosm of strategic democratic political concerns; the neocon war travesty in Iraq (Rumsfeld)... the republican culture of corruption (Abramoff) ... and an actual new House seat in play (Foley)...

---- I wouldn't worry much about Foley. His situation is local to his district and, beyond that, amounts to little more than a dirty joke for the rest of the country. It is not anything from which real political mileage may be gained outside of Foley's district,... other than perhaps in significant contacts he may have had with other GOP individuals. His situation will take care of itself. Trying to do more with it is "the low road." And worse, it's a distraction. Let it go.

---- Rumsfeld's slide really worries me. He's been trashed from all sides,... Woodward has delivered the coup de grace,.. and top level republicans are supporting his ouster. But is that what democrats want? Bush could do himself a real favor right now by firing Rumsfeld,... he would been seen as being responsive, and doing the right thing. Screw that. Besides, Rumsfeld has done not one single thing that didn't have "Cheney" written all over it. Would dumping Rumsfeld have the effect of letting Cheney off the hook a little? You're damned right it would. Democrats calling for Rumsfeld's firing is very shortsighted. If he helps Bush look bad, then for God's sake keep him on. He's an original PNAC neocon, and that's whom we're trying to incriminate.

---- Abramoff represents a more vexing problem, because the full extent of the crap he was doing is unlikely to be revealed before the election. Democrats might want to focus on the "access to the White House" angle, the hundreds of visits by Abramoff, Norquist and Reed,... that sort of thing. And Abramoff's tentacles are everywhere, to be sure. But you can't just stand up at some podium and give it the old "culture of corruption" bombast. That's already old. A little more explanation and elaboration is going to be necessary, and that means further testimonies, further hearings, etc,... the sort of thing that isn't going to happen in time to help the democrats as much as it possibly could. Another angle might be "Abramoff As The K-Street Project," ... and damn the GOP lobbying machine to hell. If you know how to do it right, you can describe what a lobbyist does so that it sounds worse that what the devil, himself does.

---- But frankly, the best thing that happened to the democrats all week was that NIE Report, followed up by the panel of dissenting generals. And there is a huge amount of background information to be recalled and dredged up in support of these two episodes. That's where electoral traction may be obtained,...... not with smut pandering in Florida.

[Jim Sagle]

1. Bull.

Hit them with everything. Hit them hard. Brutalize them. Don't stop until the word Republican is nothing but a curse word all across America.

[Parisle]

4. I agree with everything you said, Jim,...

---- I'm trying to stretch out that sentiment all the way to 2008. We want Rumsfeld's difficulties to attach to Cheney and Bush. We want the three of them still in the game come election time,... like Hitler, Goering and Goebbels,... no substitutions allowed. If you're going to portray a villain to America, you have to remain consistent. Sure,... hit 'em hard,... and cover every base, too. But there is a proportionality to it.

[Jim Sagle]

6. I agree with that as well.

I want Rummy in there to take a pounding from the activists, the retired military, and the media. The Dems should leave him alone.

What were we arguing about again? :dunce:

[xchrom]

2. i agree with you about abramoff -- because the dems

would have found where abramoff went -- there were others.

there is a simmering cess pool of corporate money swirling around bushco is unsavory and illegal combinations.

[skids]

3. Disagree on Foley.

Foley serves as a national push through the looking glass. He couldn't be more important. Were he just any congressman it might be less damaging, but as head of the Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children he brings home the very real point that snakes say one thing and do totally opposite -- he singlehandedly has ablated any capability of a congresscritter to armor themselves against suspicion by campaigning against their own vices.

Plus he will be talked about in low-brow circles. Smart Democrats build segues when they know what the popular topics of conversation will be. Foley head of the caucus --> Fox in the henhouse cronyism. Foley a Republican into child sex abuse --> Sex trade in the Marianas. Foley a rich old perv --> MZM Watergate "Hospitality suites."

Sometimes the seemingly tangential becomes a nexus for political discourse. Foley is that, and could not be more important in this role.

[jimshoes]

5. I'm only beginning

to appreciate the magnitude of those Generals coming forward with that testimony. If what I am thinking is anywhere near the reality of the situation then we have come to a tipping point in our country's continued existence as a democracy or the beginnings of a true fascist state. Not being a student of history by any stretch, I couldn't say for sure if something like this has ever happened before in the past 200 plus years, but at least I don't recall a group of Generals resigning their commissions to basically tell the people of this country that the president is ruining not only the military but the country as well. That I think is unprecedented. Randi Rhodes, who played a good bit of their testimony on her radio show was, I think, struck by the enormity of what they were saying as well.

They basically are the designated speakers, I suspect for the active duty Officer Corp who are honor bound to not say anything bad about the president or the country and what they were conveying to the outside world is that the Armed Forces have just about had it with this crew of misfits and miscreants that are in charge of the government and the military, Don Rumsfeld particularly. And I believe that the only reason we haven't started hostilities against Iran yet is because the top brass has, in some way told El Diablo to go fuck himself.

Only time will tell but I do believe the prez and the rest of the PNAC'ers have just about shot their load.