Three days that transformed America

[Seabiscuit]

If Howard Dean were campaigning for President in 2005-2006, perhaps he would have made it all the way:

From UPI:

On Thursday, a Democratic national politician for the first time managed to do what former Vice President Al Gore, Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, their running mates and more than $150 million of Democratic consulting and campaign resources signally failed to do in more than five years and two national elections: He mauled President George W. Bush....

Murtha's blistering speech Thursday could have been easily shrugged off if it came from Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, the late Sen. Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, or even Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York. But Murtha had been gung ho for the war and accepted the intelligence evaluations at face value that were presented to Congress arguing the necessity of it.

Now, he has transformed the political dynamics of the Democratic Party. He is the first prominent Democrat since former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean in his meteoric lightning rise and fall in 2003 to early 2004 to attack the president head-on on Iraq. In January 2004 in the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, Democratic voters overwhelmingly repudiated Dean's bold stand against the war and not a single leading Democrat since has dared to oppose it outspokenly and consistently.

But Murtha, who has no presidential ambitions -- at least not so far -- has smashed that consensus and that taboo. And he did so only weeks after the indictment of I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice president Dick Cheney's longtime chief of staff in the Valerie Plame leak case, and within weeks of the U.S. military death toll in Iraq finally breaking the 2,000 barrier

Murtha's speech was the third of three political body blows to hammer the president in this, yet another "black" week for he man who just a year ago was reelected to a second term with more votes than any American had ever received in history....

http://www.upi.com/SecurityTerrorism/view.php?StoryID=20051117-090928-6137r

[Wetzelbill]

1. that is a great article really great

:)

[regnaD kciN]

2. I wasn't aware...

...that Dean's loss in the 2004 primaries was due to an "overwhelming repudiation" of the anti-war position (and, thus, an equally overwhelming endorsement of the war) by Democratic voters. Silly me.

:crazy:

By the way, is the UPI still owned by Pat Robertson?

[struggle4progress]

11. "In May 2000, the media arm of Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church ..

.. bought itself electronic fingers. News World Communications, Moon's media company, purchased United Press International (UPI) ..."
http://www.mediachannel.org/originals/revmoon.shtml

[patricia92243]

3. I didn't realize Bush got the most votes of any president in history. I

thought he barely squeaked by and only got about 1% or so more than Kerry????????????

[dddem]

4. that doesn't surprise me.

I remember saying often during the last presidential election that if you could say anything good about w it would be that he did a tremendous job of eliminating apathy about an election. If he got more votes than any president in history it's because more people in general voted (of course, from what I saw, more people voted because they were trying to vote him out, but who can say what happens to any vote once it's cast).

[stilpist]

5. Just the usual corporate media spin.

I believe that Kerry also got more votes than any president in history. It was also (one of?) the most narrow "wins" in history. That is, if you believe that former governor Bush actually won. (Sorry I'm unsure of the facts - getting ready for work and no time to check. But I'm pretty sure.)

Maybe one day soon Martin Sieff will notice the recent GAO report lending credence to the belief that both Ohio and Florida were every bit as stolen in 2004 as Florida was in 2000.

[Wetzelbill]

6. yes, both Bush and Kerry got more votes

than any other American did. Of course, that's because more people voted, not necessarily because Bush is all that good. :)

[DavidDvorkin]

7. I bet Ross Perot got more votes than Washington or Lincoln

Population growth makes numerical comparisons tricky.

[depakid]

8. Innumeracy

Raw numbers mean nothing.

Just goes to show how equivocal journalists can be when they're writing copy under deadline.

[Seabiscuit]

10. I think the author phrased it that way just for dramatic contrast . If he

had just written: "President George Bush, who just a year ago narrowly "won" the election (although the GAO now indicates he may have actually stolen the election by committing election fraud, as his critics have long maintained), is being subjected again this week to some nasty criticism from the leftist anti-war fringe of the Democratic Party..."

Doesn't quite have the same impact, does it?

:spray:

[Hekate]

12. Impact? I'd be bowled over if I read a statement that honest off UPI

But I guess that's just me being another disgruntled Democrat ;-)

Hekate

[RedEarth]

9. I love "black weeks" for bush ...

[teryang]

13. We are losing the war, this is the decisive political factor

Politicians HAVE TO DISSOCIATE THEMSELVES from failed military efforts.

Only the dumbest boxes of rocks can still pretend we are succeeding in Iraq.