Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

OK, we need a popular DEM to speak up NOW and frame this issue

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 09:11 AM
Original message
OK, we need a popular DEM to speak up NOW and frame this issue
Edited on Mon Oct-09-06 09:12 AM by Truth Hurts A Lot
So that the repukes well be on the defense again. NO time to waste! Who will do it? For example, we spent billions in Iraq and now have no money or troops left for N Korea, and that a draft might be coming, thanks to Bush.

ETA: It's important that it be a POPULAR Dem because otherwise the media won't cover it, and the statement needs to be very harsh and unpolitically correct
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Greeby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. The media probably won't cover it anyway
I mean, does anyone seriously believe the media makes any pretense at balance anymore? Or that someone would be willing to do Democrats a favour, as opposed to doing for Shrub what Monica did for Clinton :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. It was the lead story in our hick hometown newsrag. (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. we don't need to frame it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. True. Since when do we need to "frame" the truth?
Rather than simply telling it in the simplest and bluntest form possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. you are right, but, Bush & Co. will use this to prove their agenda
Which is why I say we should frame the issue first!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveEconomist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
5. How's this for a frame:Dubya's been in a "State of Denial" on NK nukes
since October 2002, when HE DID NOTHING about NK's commencing reprocessing spent reactor fuel rods into plutonium. This weekend's nuclear test has been just a matter of time since then.

Under Bill Clinton, those spent nuclear fuel rods were locked in internationally-inspected storage facilities and were slated for removal from NK under an agreement negotiated by for Clinton by Jimmy Carter in 1994. Overruling Colin Powell, who wanted to continue the diplomatic process begun under Clinton, Dubya abrogated the NK agreement in favor of reliance on a "Star Wars" missile defense shield. Of course, there are grave doubts about the practicability of current missile defense technology, and about the wisdom of substantial contracts Dubya awarded to Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and other heavy Republican political contributors.

In other words, proliferation of NK nukes on Dubya's watch are part of a pattern of extraordinary WH incompetence encompassing pre-9/11 antiterror policy, pre-Katrina disaster policy, and the decision to ignore many warnings about entanglement in a ground war in Iraq.

From http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0405.kap... :

"Rolling Blunder: How the Bush administration let North Korea get nukes.

By Fred Kaplan; May 2004

On Oct. 4, 2002, officials from the U.S. State Department flew to Pyongyang, the capital of North Korea, and confronted Kim Jong-il's foreign ministry ... After a few shrill diplomatic exchanges over the uranium, Pyongyang upped the ante. The North Koreans expelled the international inspectors, broke the locks on the fuel rods, loaded them onto a truck, and drove them to a nearby reprocessing facility, to be converted into bomb-grade plutonium. The White House stood by and did nothing. Why did George W. Bush--his foreign policy avowedly devoted to stopping "rogue regimes" from acquiring weapons of mass destruction--allow one of the world's most dangerous regimes to acquire the makings of the deadliest WMDs? Given the current mayhem and bloodshed in Iraq, it's hard to imagine a decision more ill-conceived than invading that country unilaterally ...

Yet Bush has neither threatened (North Korea with) war nor pursued diplomacy.... The pattern of decision making that led to this debacle--as described to me in recent interviews with key former administration officials who participated in the events--will sound familiar to anyone who has watched Bush and his cabinet in action. It is a pattern of wishful thinking, blinding moral outrage, willful ignorance of foreign cultures, a naive faith in American triumphalism, a contempt for the messy compromises of diplomacy, and a knee-jerk refusal to do anything the way the Clinton administration did it."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totallybushed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-09-06 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
6. Will this draft thing
never go away?

There's not going to be a draft. Not as long as the Repukes are in power. The ONLY people talking about it are Democratic non-candidates. When this kind of mud is slung, it stands a far greater chance of winding up on the slinger than the slingee, and WILL NOT HURT THE REPUBLICANS.

But it could hurt them Democrats. People will think, "Oh, yeah, gotta fix the mess the Rs made. We need a draft, for sure, and the Dems will give it to us". NOT. What they will say is, "The Dems are calling for a draft to fix the mess the Rs have made. Hmm. It doesn't look all that bad a mess to me."

I know that we need to show the electorate how the Rs are ruling through fear of terrorism, gays, choice, minorities, cultural suicide, etc. But is our indulging in scare tactics the way to do it? Maybe it is. But I don't have to like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 04:35 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC